Nitty Gritty: Three Questions for Jury to Answer in Trayvon Martin Murder Case

Monday, December 31, 2012

Thankfully, 2012 will soon pass into the rearview mirror.

As we look forward to next year, I think today is a good day to review the three predominant questions that the jury will have to decide when the defendant charged with murdering Trayvon Martin goes to trial. I posted this comment last night.

Actually, O’Mara has conceded that SYG and the castle doctrine do not apply and the evidence will show that, as a matter of law, the defendant was the aggressor.

As the aggressor, the defendant can use deadly force in self-defense only if,

(a) Trayvon responded to his aggression by using more force than was reasonably necessary to defend himself;

(b) He reasonably perceived that Trayvon’s use of such force created an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury; and

(c) He attempted to end the confrontation and withdraw before he used deadly force.

O’Mara announced at a press conference that he will argue that the defendant could not withdraw before using deadly force because the defendant was lying on his back unable to withdraw with Trayvon straddling him raining down blows MMA style and slamming his head into the concrete sidewalk.

Those are the basic three questions that the jury will have to decide.

The Court will instruct the jury to presume the answer to all 3 questions is “Yes,” and the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the answer is “No.”

Keep in mind that, as a practical matter, the defendant will have to testify and that means he will be cross examined, thoroughly.

Malisha was the only person to attempt an answer and this is what she said:

Professor, thanks for the clarity.

The three questions. I love them. I always love “three questions.”

(a) Did Trayvon respond to Fogen’s aggression by using more force than was reasonably necessary to defend himself?

I think the answer “NO” is easy to prove because in fact Fogen killed Trayvon. Thus, Fogen’s aggression against Trayvon was, by definition, potentially lethal from the get-go. Thus, also by definition, deadly force was authorized.

(b) Did Fogen reasonably perceive that Trayvon’s use of such force created an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury to himself, to Fogen?

I think the answer “NO” is also easy to prove because injuries that Fogen sustained were nowhere near life-threatening. If he was beaten at all, he was beaten in such a way as to do no serious damage. A fender bender would have hurt him more than the encounter with Trayvon Martin hurt him, even if both scratches on his head AND a minor injury to his nose were all attributable to contact with Trayvon Martin.

(c) Did Fogen attempt to end the confrontation and withdraw before he used deadly force?

Fogen has not even claimed that he did so. Even as he narrated his non-credible self-defense story, he claims that he told the neighbor to help him “restrain” Trayvon Martin, but he never told Trayvon Martin that he wanted to stop fighting. Nor did he tell Trayvon Martin, at any point (according to his own narrative) that he had a gun and would shoot unless Trayvon Martin stopped hurting him. Remember, even as he narrated that he “spread out [Trayvon’s] hands,” he still claimed that Trayvon was continuing to struggle and curse. And at no time before or after firing his one shot did Fogen say, “I’m leaving now; I’m going back to my schtruck now; I’ll leave you alone now,” or even, “The police are coming so stop fighting now and we’ll wait for them.”

Now it is your turn. What are your thoughts?

How do you think the defendant will do on cross examination?

I also will start an open thread for those who wish to discuss other matters.

Many thanks and many blessings to all of you for participating and making this blog a great and safe place to discuss the case.

Happy New Year!!!!!!!!

Fred

289 Responses to Nitty Gritty: Three Questions for Jury to Answer in Trayvon Martin Murder Case

  1. ladystclaire says:

    in reading some of the comments, I have read a few concerning fogen’s *SELF SERVING APOLOGY* and, what I would like to know is, why did O’Mara stand in front of him the entire time while he was talking oh, I mean while he was lying. I sure would like to know what that was all about.

  2. Ty Flair says:

    Even though this case look winable to us,we also have to look at if he win this case. Look at the OJ trail we knew he did it,but the defense but doubt in the jury mind with the glove,an the crooked cop. So im thinking O’MARA will go after Serino,an use those pictures,thats all he have. If he plant one seed of doubt in one jury head he has done his job, thats what worries me.

    • truthseeker66 says:

      That my fear as well. I think he will be aquited. Whites don’t normally get guilty verdicts for crimes against blacks. Just saying…

      • cielo62 says:

        Not a chance GZ gets acquitted. Too much evidence. Too many people watching this case to sweep it under a rug.

        Sent from my iPod

      • ladystclaire says:

        What makes you think this jury is going to comprised of all white people or mostly whites? IF he is acquitted in the State of Florida, I believe the Feds will have a go at him for a hate crime and, he won’t walk away from that.

    • Malisha says:

      But in the OJ case they did not have solid evidence that OJ had actually committed the KILLINGS. In this case, the prosecution has solid evidence AND Fogen’s confirmation that he in fact was the person who killed Trayvon Martin. This kind of “head start” was not available in the Casey Anthony trial or the OJ Simpson trial. All that is up for grabs in the Trayvon Martin killing case is whether or not Fogen was JUSTIFIED in killing Trayvon Martin, not whether he did it or not.

      His explanation of his justification just doesn’t fly. It’s lighter than air, OK, and it’s flapping around a lot, that too, but in the final analysis: IT WILL NOT FLY.

      His defense is a dead duck. Rhymes with…bad luck.

      • truthseeker66 says:

        Do you recall the case in PA a few years back? In Shenandoah I believe. White teens bludgeoned Hispanic man, undocumented worker. Small racist town. The jury aquited all but 1. The one who delivered th carrot blow was found guilty of aggravated assault. It took the DOJ to file hate crime charges in federal court to get murder conviction under hate crime statutes.

    • Xena says:

      Look at the OJ trail we knew he did it,…

      I didn’t, and the majority of people I know didn’t think he did it either. What I considered is that OJ may have known who was behind it, or the reason for it, but he did not commit those murders himself.

      • cielo62 says:

        Xena- this is one we can’t agree on. I believe OJ is guilty; he had motive and opportunity. What he also had were lousy prosecutors and corrupt cops. The system worked as it was designed to do. Sometimes a guilty one gets through but it preserves the system for the sake of the truly not guilty ones. SPD cops; corrupt but not actively planting evidence in this case. Prosecutors look up to the task of putting this 2 bit loser away for 25 years to life.

        Sent from my iPod

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          You can scratch “opportunity”, one of OJ’s neighbors came forward later and said they saw OJ walking his dog about the time the murders were underway. They didn’t come forward because they didn’t want to get involved. But they remember it, because they looked out the window and saw OJ’s dog, relieving itself on their lawn and they didn’t like OJ doing that, but they didn’t confront him about it either.

          So, all the blood evidence came from OJ’s exemplars, taken from the lab by Fung, and carried to Bundy, to Rockingham and to the Print shed, and the amount of missing blood from the vial, is just what was deposited in those three places. In fact, the sock, found with blood on it, on OJ’s bedroom floor, had transfer blood, from side 1 to side 2 to side 3. Meaning there was no foot in the sock when the blood was applied.

          More? Parks got to Rockingham 15 minutes early and patrolled the front gate. Kato opened the gate for Park, OJ came out of the house. There is no way he could have gotten in, if he had returned from Bundy. Meanwhile, over at Bundy, there was Goldmans blood trail from his car, parked on Dorothy near the back alley, that led all the way around to inside the front gate. Meaning that while Nicole was being held there, Someone attacked Goldman and forced him up Dorothy and around to inside the front gate.

          Faye Resnick had a terrible drug habit, and had gone through her settlement money. In fact both Nicole and Faye had gone through a million eight hundred thousand dollars in just under 2 years. They were both broke. They needed OJ to pay for drugs they had obtained on credit. Nicole tried to effect a reconciliation, after she broke up with Mark Fuhrman, but that reconciliation failed. While Goldman was dealing drugs along with his two friends who were also waiters, living way above their means. Google Michael Nigg and have a look see. So, two users and one dealer were killed that night. While Goldman’s drug dealing waiter friends were killed in the prior two months. Goldman was discovered to have a huge stash of cash at home, much more than he could have earned in years at waiting tables.

          Meanwhile, OJ was suffering from arthritis so bad that he had to stop doing Hertz commercials, where he was running through airports to rent cars. His doctor had just increased his pain medication dosage. The evidence shows that the police attempted to frame OJ for the crime. Of course, the media kept the real evidence out of the public’s view and talked of juror nullification, to explain why all the false takes they were promoting had no effect on the jury.

          • Diane says:

            I never heard any of this before. It is blowing my mind. Usually National Enquirer will be the first to try to get the real deal out there. Sounds like a conspiracy.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Yeah, Henry Lee came back, months after the trial to reveal that there was a trail of blood drops from Dorothy to the front gate, that were not mentioned at the trial. Months more went by, then he came back to reveal that Ron Goldman’s car was parked on Dorothy at the Alley and had been left there for days, according to neighbors across the street. Then he revealed that the blood trail started there, went up Dorothy and turned left and went to the front gate.

            Then a few years later, a woman who lived across the street from OJ, said that OJ was a nuisance to her, because he would often let his dog do his business on her lawn and she didn’t like it. She had been looking out her window that night and saw OJ walking his dog and sure enough the dog went on her lawn again.

            The “Dream Team” nor the prosecutor wanted bring in any more blood evidence, because it was a balancing match to begin with, because Judge Ito’s wife was a Commander of the very same police precinct Fuhrman was assigned to. So both sides were treading on eggs. If either side got too “rambunctious” about making their case, it would have been a deal breaker. Ito would have had to recuse and the trial would have had to start over. They didn’t even want to connect Fuhrman with the busted Ramparts division.

            But we did find out, during the trial that Fuhrman had lied about why it took him an hour and a half to respond to his call to duty that day. He said that he had driven all night, returning from a seminar at a hotel (can’t remember where) but, calls were placed to that hotel and sure enough there had been a police seminar, only it had been held the previous week. I think the Mercury News reported on that, after it was all over the newsgroups and group emails. Nothing ever came of it.

          • jm says:

            Where did you get all your info regarding OJ case Lonnie? Did I read correctly that Nicole was seeing Mark Furhman before her murder?

            The reason I ask is because I was the only person back then who did not believe OJ killed Ron Goldman and Nicole.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            The information that Fuhrman was seeing Nicole comes from a mention that Fuhrman knew about and had seen Nicole’s breast augmentation scars. He had met her, if you remember, when he responded to a call at Rockingham, when OJ was smashing the Mercedes with that bat. Fuhrman wanted to do something about it, because he didn’t like Black men who marry white women, he had a serious problem with that. But there was nothing he could do, because OJ owned that car.

            It would not have been difficult at all for Fuhrman to get Nicole’s particulars. Even then she was appearing at the neighborhood drug hole, that the local Starbucks was. That was where she met Faye and Goldman.

            Funny Fuhrman retired to Idaho, just 35 miles from the Aryan Nation compound at Hayden lake before it was closed down.

          • cielo62 says:

            Lonnie- I, too, want to know your sources. I believe OJ killed them. But then again, all I had were the news outlets MISinformation.

            Sent from my iPod

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Wow, remind me that the case is almost 19 years old come June.
            I burned a cd with the transcripts, I haven’t revisited them so I don’t know what else is on them or where to find the data, because I didn’t catalog them. But we started getting this stuff on usenet with links to sites that are no longer around. If any of it is available it may take quite a bit of searching. And, worse yet, about five or six years ago, I remember checking Jack Walraven’s site, only to find he had altered transcripts posted there. Maybe the site had been hacked, I figure, because he was a pro-Jay.

            Anyway, if you do a few searches every once in a while you’ll come across it. I think the blood evidence was in Henry Lee’s book on the case. The stuff about Fuhrman and Nicole was found on news websites. Might try Mercury news, they tried to print everything the MSM was avoiding. I have no idea how far back their online archives go.

          • cielo62 says:

            Thanks! Has it really been 19 years? Since OJ was the only suspect, the real murderers have escaped Scott free. Unless you are hinting that Furhman was the actual murderer? I wouldn’t doubt that.

            Sent from my iPod

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            I doubt Fuhrman did it himself, but I think he knew it was going to happen, and probably knew the people who did it, if they weren’t working for him. There’s very big money in drugs and that’s more than enough to corrupt even policemen. Two of Ron Goldman’s friends were killed, both were waiters, peddling drugs and had more cash than they could have earned waiting tables.

            Mark Fuhrman came to the West LA force, where Judge Ito’s wife was a Captain. He came from the Ramparts division where the police there were running amok. They had a very big police corruption bust in the Ramparts division after Mark Fuhrman left. So, much of what he was telling Jill Shively, for her book, was true!

            She had been watching the case and called the defense to tell them what she had recorded Mark saying for her book. F. Lee Bailey took it from there, and Mark perjured himself on the stand.

          • jm says:

            Seems within the last year there was a guy who claimed he was hired by OJ to kill Nicole and before that was a book out that I believe accused OJ’s son of killing Nicole and Ron.

            I always argued that I did not think OJ was that stupid and if he really hated Nicole he would hire someone. Not sure if I believe OJ is that smart at this point in time.

            So you think the killings were some sort of a drug thing that Nicole and Ron were into? Did OJ know anything about this?

            As far as Faye Resnick, she is on Real Housewives of Beverly Hills, a most annoying person who seems full of herself, with lots of obvious cosmetic surgery.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            I think that it was drug related, and that Mark Fuhrman instigated it by pulling his protection from them. It happened after Nicole tried and failed to reconcile with OJ. He really did like her a lot, but she had issues. Faye played her like a cheap guitar. Remember, OJ already knew and had caught her giving blow jobs at Gretna Green to Keith Zalomovich, the general manager and Mezzaluna where Goldman worked and probably sold drugs. Keith hosted Faye and Nicole in Aspen, so they liked to run with the fast crowd, but it cost them quite a bit to do so, that and Faye’s drug habit.
            They’d probably ran up quite some drug debts, I figure the reconciliation was all about trying to get OJ to pay off the debts.

            Meanwhile, Ron, like his two friends, had to be running some kind of scam on their drug suppliers, which is why they ended up dead. The police covered their murders over by calling them robberies gone bad, even though there was no evidence that either had been robbed.

            Nothing sends a racist ballistic like a white woman with a black man. So there’s that, and Fuhrman’s later closeness with Ayrian Nation’s Hayden lake. He was, however, in a position to protect them all from drug dealers/traffickers, When he heard that Nicole was trying to go back with OJ, I figure, that pushed Fuhrman over the edge. All he’d have to do is let it be known that he was no longer on her side and she’d be done for.

            My guess? I think that woman manager at Mezzaluna, filtched Mrs Browns prescription glasses. When Brown called back for them, she said she found them in the street near the curb. She then offered to send them over to Nichole’s via Goldman. It was widely known that Goldman knew Nicole, since she even lent him the Jaguar to drive around in. You know he had to show that off.

            When he got over to Bundy, he probably noticed something going on and tried to make away in his car, but was caught before he could get in the car and forced back to the front gate area. Fuhrman was probably lurking nearby with the gloves. He bloodied them up and left one, took the other over and planted it at Rockingham, before he went to report in at the station an hour and a half late.

            Well, that’s the way I figure things happened. The killers could have been Aryan Nation too, since they deal drugs and rob banks to raise money for their cause. Well, enough, back to the case at hand.

          • Diane says:

            I keep remembering Goldman’s anger at OJ. He talked like his son was an innocent party murdered by OJ. Wow!

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Oh yeah, Fred Goldman, the guy who ignored all that cash his son had in his apartment. The guy who didn’t want to hear that his son was dealing drugs.

            That night, after Ron Goldman had delivered the glasses to Nicole, he was scheduled to go back to Mezzaluna and pick up the bartender. They had plans to go to Marina Del Rey, where they planned to spend the night drinking Margarita’s and selling drugs.
            Hardly a wonder that Fred didn’t want to acknowledge that anyone other than OJ and killed his son. Good that he never got a dime!

          • cielo62 says:

            Goldman probably had no idea his son was running drugs. His anger was sincere.

            Sent from my iPod

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            For more on OJ, I found these sites, they’re listed at the very bottom of the page in the “Blogs I link to” section. Be careful, there’s lots of missing information as they’re trying to be brief and
            using books rather than the newspaper articles out at that time.
            Otherwise they’re pretty close to the truth.
            They also has some info I’d either forgotten or never knew.

            http://tinyurl.com/6fstopo

          • cielo62 says:

            Lonnie- thank you. I will admit my major prejudice in the OJ case wasn’t race. It was celebrity. Those rich famous assholes; they always get away!

            I will now do some research I have never done before.

            Sent from my iPod

          • Diane says:

            I’m flabbergasted. We have a justice system that allows this to happen. Where is the justice?

          • cielo62 says:

            Maybe justice was served. OJ was found not guilty. That they stopped looking us the embedded racism of many police departments.

            Sent from my iPod

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            Unfortunately you can’t separate politics from law. Most legal cases have little political value, so the biggest players don’t get involved. But then “office politics” take over. If the department bigs are inclined to be racists, or if the elected officials are expected to be racists by the people who vote for them, then that’s the kind of law enforcement you’ll get.

            With the OJ case, you had a whole lot of things going on behind the scenes, Ito was about the only judge they could afford to put in front of the national spotlight, but he had a LAPD wife. There was a lot of corruption in the DA’s office that also had to be tip toed around in order to put on the case. So, everyone was walking on eggshells, trying not to rock the boat too much because too many big people would fall. I’m pretty sure the Justice dept. knew what was going on, so they weren’t going to countenance OJ being found guilty by being framed. The police went ahead and tried, not knowing that the deck was already stacked against them succeeding. The case was just too high profile for any of their usual shenanigans to work.

      • Rachael says:

        Cielo, I’m with you on this one. I think he was guilty as all get out – but what I think has nothing to do with the evidence and if the evidence was not there or was corrupted, that is how it goes. That is what keeps the system fair to everyone, and I mentioned this on the next topic. It isn’t what you know, it is what you can prove.

        • cielo62 says:

          Exactly Rachel. I just didn’t say it so clearly. They couldn’t prove OJs guilt so he had to be released. That same system will put GZ away because the evidence is concrete and hard to refute.

          Sent from my iPod

      • Looolooo says:

        @ Xena……WOW!!! We’re gonna have to have DNA tests done to once and for all prove or disprove my suspicions that we were separated at birth. I’ve had the EXACT same thoughts about the OJ case as you have. I’ve never thought that HE did the murders, but knows Why and or who did the murders. Have you ever seen the video by author/investigator William C. Dear, called “The Overlooked Suspect – O.J. is Guilty but, not of murder”? I saw it twice 2 years ago, it has since been removed from youtube and other sites (that I can find at least). It made a lot of sense. His investigation has lead him to none other than Jason Simpson as the true murderer. Someone who received very little attention, but who had some what of a motive, albeit semi far fetched. Check out his book or video IF you can track it down. Knowing you, you will find it some how. It’s nice to know that I’m not alone in my thinking.

        • Xena says:

          Check out his book or video IF you can track it down. Knowing you, you will find it some how. It’s nice to know that I’m not alone in my thinking.

          @Looooloooo. Thanks for the info. I’ll look up the book. It’s good to know I’m not alone on this, especially since I didn’t follow the case that close.

      • Looolooo says:

        Double WOW…..Lonnie Starr! I thought that I knew alot about the OJ case; Nicole and Faye’s major drug use and connections, Goldman’ drug dealing along with his fellow drug dealing waiter friends and room-mates, murdered Michael Nigg (nearly decapitated like Ron and Nicole), the other waiter friend shot in a parking lot, Keith zlomsowitch, drug dealings at all Mezzaluna resturants, Nicole’s sisters and their drug connections, Robert Kardashian and the mysterious disapearing bag that OJ brought back from Chicago (that may have contained drugs),etc, etc, etc. But you’ve put me to shame with your knowledge and or theories. Nicole and Mark Furhman? Really? Why was soooo much information kept quiet? Did you know that Faye Resnick and Kyle Richards (from RHoBH) are best friends? Faye is STILL keeping some very interesting company…. isn’t she?

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          These very public trials have to be “stage managed” because of the many and dangerous considerations that lurk in the background. They don’t want the trial to become the focus of opening cans of worms, exposing the entire power structure to challenge. The only way to keep the focus narrow is to make trade offs and exclude as much as possible, that which isn’t wanted, that would cast a pall over people, other than the main characters.

          Fact is, if the truth be told, everyone’s guilty! If a trial somewhere in the country is going to require that the entire nation be exposed as crooks, liars and lawbreakers, the quest for justice isn’t going to get much traction. Of course, I exaggerate, but you can grasp my drift.
          If you try to catch too many big fish, your boat will sink and you’ll have no fish at all.

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      You know, most people who think OJ did it, I have found, never have read the transcripts, but just followed the case on the news.
      There was no “juror nullification” there. All that happened was the media misleading the public by mischaracterizing what was going on, and then, when the jury came back with the proper decision, the media covered up their tomfoolery reportage with “juror nullification” to explain why they had been so wrong. Just like Fox new trying to explain why, since their reports had Romney so far out ahead of Obama, Romney lost so badly.

      Don’t even worry about juror nullification here, that’s not going to happen. If, and when it does happen, it’s over a matter where, the jury feels very strongly that, they would have done the same thing themselves, if faced with those same conditions. So, they fail to convict. That’s not going to happen here because, all the jury is going to have to work with is lies on the part of the defense. They may not believe the prosecution, but egregious lies by the defense are so terribly offensive, they won’t be able to restrain themselves.

      Note that GZ has already turned off most of his former supporters?
      Even the racists are giving up on him.

      • Xena says:

        Note that GZ has already turned off most of his former supporters?
        Even the racists are giving up on him.

        Those supporters remaining are opportunists who use GZ’s case to demonize Trayvon Martin. Their arguments have turned to GZ being justified in killing Trayvon because his parents were divorced, or Trayvon would have been useless as an adult, or some other theory where they look into the future and predict the life of every Black male — because — to them, Trayvon represents every Black male — but they claim that they are not bigoted racists.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Delusional people usually begin by deceiving themselves. Thus they don’t realize that their sheets are flapping wildly in the wind for all to see, as they post. Want to do the world a favor? Provoke them whenever you can, to make them leave ever stronger and longer trails.

          • Xena says:

            Provoke them whenever you can, to make them leave ever stronger and longer trails.

            I prefer not to because when I do, I get a conceited, condescending attitude. So, I can’t let them take me down to their level.

      • cielo62 says:

        Lonnie- true. During that time I certainly had no means or time to follow the case as closely as i can follow this one. But I was struck by 2 pieces of evidence nobody could explain away (for my satisfaction): the footprints of the handmade shoes OJ wore, and his cut up hands similar to having been in a fight with a knife. That glove thing was just stupid. That is why I believe to this day he is guilty.

        Sent from my iPod

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Well, suffice it to say, he had no opportunity to do the things that are needed to account for the evidence that was planted. Nor the evidence that was found, but not revealed at the trial. Had OJ fought with anyone that night, he’d have been moving like a crippled person when he caught the limo, not merely sweating a little. Besides, the limo driver got there early, he would have seen OJ trying to get into the house. Instead he saw OJ coming out of the house. There was no time to get rid of any bloody clothing.
          There was no way for OJ to re enter the house without being seen.
          And there was a witness, who came forward later, who accounted for the time while OJ would have had to have been at Bundy. He simply could not have been there at all.

  3. Mike says:

    After watching LMPapas new video I did some investigating on juniors twitter campaign, and its pretty pathetic. I wonder what his motives are.

  4. colin black says:

    I agree Trayvon wouldnt have ended the fight because he may have heard him shout for help to a wittness,

    I M O What may have caused hin to relax slightly or loosen any defensive posture /hold/block/pinnind down/struggle.
    Is hearing the wittness respond that they were phoneing 911..

    This may have given the acccused the chance to extend his arm an aim without fear of shooting his own personage………….Just speculation though/

    As Trayvon cant be here to tell the truth.

    An the acussed never will tell the truth .

  5. SearchingMind says:

    Dissenting Opinion III

    @ Professor, Malisha

    I disagree with the following,

    “(c) Did Fogen attempt to end the confrontation and withdraw before he used deadly force?

    Fogen has not even claimed that he did so. Even as he narrated his non-credible self-defense story, he claims that he told the neighbor to help him “restrain” Trayvon Martin, but he never told Trayvon Martin that he wanted to stop fighting. Nor did he tell Trayvon Martin, at any point (according to his own narrative) that he had a gun and would shoot unless Trayvon Martin stopped hurting him. Remember, even as he narrated that he “spread out [Trayvon’s] hands,” he still claimed that Trayvon was continuing to struggle and curse. And at no time before or after firing his one shot did Fogen say, “I’m leaving now; I’m going back to my schtruck now; I’ll leave you alone now,” or even, “The police are coming so stop fighting now and we’ll wait for them.”

    The above cannot be accepted as true on the following grounds: the defendant did indeed state that as soon as Trayvon hit him (and I know that’s BS) he fell and started yelling for help. That, if accepted as truth, must by necessity be construed as “attempt to end the confrontation and withdraw before he used deadly force”.

    But the truth is:
    – It was Trayvon who was yelling help;
    – It was Trayvon who was answering ‘I don’t know ‘em’
    – It was Trayvon who said ‘no, no (don’t shoot)’; (and there is more to come, aka BDLR);
    – It was the defendant who was armed during the “confrontation” – not Trayvon;
    – It was the defendant who told Chris Serino that he had Trayvon in wrist lock and as such 100% control of the situation.
    – The situation does not even arise where the defendant had to attempt to end the confrontation and withdraw before he used deadly force. The defendant had total control of the situation. Trayvon could not have affected the outcome thereof.

    • Malisha says:

      I disagree with you here too, SearchingMind. Fogen’s alleged cries for “help” would in no way make Trayvon assume that Fogen was ready to withdraw from the fight. In fact, Trayvon might well have presumed that those shouts were motivated by Fogen’s desire to have a few Klan members who had been hanging out at the Kalubb-House come out to help him subdue his prey so they could assist in stuffing Trayvon into the schtruck to take him away. In fact, even if the entire story went as Fogen said, but there was only the injury documented, what you would have would be a kid who was frightened and stalked trying to make a preemptive strike against his pursuer but not managing to do much damage. At no point even in Fogen’s story will the self-defense claim work because of exactly what Serino said: capillary-type lacerations not coinciding with the story of the near-fatal beat-down that forced Fogen to kill in self-defense.

  6. SearchingMind says:

    Dissenting Opinion II

    @ Professor, Malisha

    I disagree with the following,

    “(b) Did Fogen reasonably perceive that Trayvon’s use of such force created an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury to himself, to Fogen? I think the answer “NO” is also easy to prove because injuries that Fogen sustained were nowhere near life-threatening. If he was beaten at all, he was beaten in such a way as to do no serious damage. A fender bender would have hurt him more than the encounter with Trayvon Martin hurt him, even if both scratches on his head AND a minor injury to his nose were all attributable to contact with Trayvon Martin.”

    Again this answer primarily presupposes that the minor injuries on the defendant were caused by Trayvon. I have seen no objective basis for such a conclusion. If we insist on having fair trial/a discussion that is qualitatively distinct from that on other sites, we must be precise and clear as to what we mean. We are not allowed to just assume facts or appear to be doing so – no matter whose ox is gored.

    • Jun says:

      You are correct but so is Malisha, considering, the basis for the defendant’s argument is his so called or lack thereof injuries

    • The three nitty-gritty questions that I formulated presuppose no facts. They are straight from the the legal test for self-defense.

      These questions are at the heart of the case.

      I didn’t get the impression that Malisha assumed any set of facts. She said even if the defendant caused the defendant’s injuries, they were not sufficient to justify his use of deadly force.

    • Malisha says:

      On this one I stick to what I said, SearchingMind. In this question we ask whether Fogen “reasonably believed” that the force applied to him — according to HIS OWN DESCRIPTION — was likely to cause death or serious bodily injury to himself RIGHT THEN. Remember, he knew the police would be there any minute (and there is evidence that Tim Smith was there already) and neighbors were emerging from their doorways.

      He could not have “reasonably believed” that he was THEN in danger of great bodily harm or death. Even if the injuries were caused by a falling ostrich that suddenly dropped out of a helicopter right on top of Fogen, he could not have reasonably believed that he was in danger of imminent “great bodily injury” or death.

      • Cercando Luce says:

        Actually, ostriches are said to be capable of eviscerating a man with a single kick. But we know that there was no actual ostrich there on 2/26/12, although the PTB’s at the Sanford Police Department tried hard to get everyone to stick their heads in the sand.

  7. SearchingMind says:

    Dissenting Opinion I

    @ Professor, Malisha

    I disagree with the following,

    “(a) Did Trayvon respond to Fogen’s aggression by using more force than was reasonably necessary to defend himself? I think the answer “NO” is easy to prove because in fact Fogen killed Trayvon. Thus, Fogen’s aggression against Trayvon was, by definition, potentially lethal from the get-go. Thus, also by definition, deadly force was authorized.”

    I find the above statement/answer intrinsically false and/or does not address the question posed. If this statement/answer were to be true, no self-defense claim can be made in cases where the victim is dead, because, it presupposes lack use of unreasonable force on the part by the victim based solely on the ground that the victim is dead. That’s a non-sequitur. Furthermore, the statement/answer does not even (attempt to) answer the question posed, because the lethality of the force employed by defendant says completely naught about the (nature of the) force, if any, applied by the victim.

    I think that the answer to the question is simply: ‘NO. There is no evidence that Trayvon used any force against the defendant to defend himself”. Trayvon’s hands and fingernail scrapings were meticulously tested for traces of blood/DNA with the latest state of the art equipment. Not a single trace of the defendant’s DNA was found on Trayvon. As such, Trayvon, one must conclude, did not defend himself against the defendant, either because he threw his hands up in the air (after defendant’s gun was pointed at him) or because he was immobilized (by the defendant). We do not know how the defendant got the scratches on his face and the tiny laceration at the back of his head neither are we required to prove that. Regardless of the fact that there is no evidence those two tiny superficial lacerations and scratches were inflicted by Trayvon, they are not even remotely consistent with the application of deadly force on the defendant’.

    • SearchingMind says:

      pls. read: because, it presupposes lack (***) of unreasonable force …

    • Jun says:

      I disagree

      Considering the defendant’s actions and statements, it would be reasonable for anyone to believe they were in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, and Trayvon’s fears happened to come to fruition, hence Trayvon could have responded and been justified by using deadly force

      If you look at the evidence, on top of targeting and stalking the kid in a threatening aggravated manner, once he confronted the victim, the defendant continued the escalation of the hostile situation by attacking the victim and then presented the threat of imminent death or great bodily harm, therefore, Trayvon has SYG to use deadly force, and in fact, the kid did not use any force anyways

      It is a strong point nonetheless

    • Malisha says:

      SearchingMind, you’re right. I see the logic of what you’re saying.

      Of course, what I was thinking when I went down the wrong logical path was that Fogen really had his gun out by the time there was screaming and shouting heard, and that any amount of force on Trayvon’s part was completely justified because he was being threatened with a gun by a stranger.

      Let me go back to the question, though, and pretend (yes, Singleton’s word) that Fogen’s version of the story, to the extent that the physical evidence supports it, is true.

      HOW MUCH OF FOGEN’S STORY is supported by physical evidence?

      [two small lacerations on the back of Fogen’s head that occurred prior to Trayvon’s death] plus [evidence of impact to Fogen’s nose by something at some point prior to Trayvon’s death]

      plus

      [one drop of Fogen’s blood on Trayvon’s hoodie] plus [no DNA from Fogen on Trayvon’s hands] plus [no bruising or abrasions on the top surfaces of Trayvon’s knuckles on either hand] plus [one quarter-inch abrasion on the inside of the ring finger on Trayvon’s left hand, not bleeding at time of Trayvon’s death].

      In other words, possibly Trayvon was responsible for one blow that made contact with Fogen’s nose, either by throwing something (such as a bag containing a can of iced tea) or by hitting, AND possibly Trayvon was responsibe for one or two contacts the back of Fogen’s head made with something small but hard enough to produce a laceration, NOT a concrete sidewalk.

      This makes the amount of force applied by Trayvon Martin to Fogen about the same amount of force that two boys on the playground apply to each other when arguing over who won a game. Both boys should get detention. None of the force was extreme nor was it life-threatening.

      Now, back to the question: Was the amount of force allegedly applied to Fogen by Trayvon out of proportion to the threat?

      NO.

      The threat was a stranger coming up to Trayvon in the dark in the rain after having followed Trayvon in a car. Trayvon knew the car was still there. Thus, the stranger could perfectly easily be preparing to subdue Trayvon and put him in that car. That could lead to a kidnapping, a rape, even a death. Trayvon was justified in using as much force as he could muster to prevent that from happening. Since Fogen does not allege that he said anything reassuring to Trayvon, such as, “I mean you no harm, I’m just a neighborhood watch volunteer,” or any variety of statements like that, Trayvon’s assumptions about his being in danger certainly justify the amount of force that can be shown to have occurred SOMEHOW before he was killed.

  8. Rachael says:

    OMG, he got SO defensive with BDLR’s questions! I just cannot see him holding up under questioning. He is too full of himself. I don’t care how much coaching he has, I don’t think he can overcome himself.

    • Xena says:

      OMG, he got SO defensive with BDLR’s questions! I just cannot see him holding up under questioning.

      Yep. He was angry like a son-of-a-gun, which is why he wanted to address the court at the bond do-over without being crossed examined. At the first bond hearing, GZ went from wanting to address the court; to:
      1. Not wanting to address Trayvon’s parents but they were in court; to
      2. The apology was intended for Trayvon’s parents; to,
      3. He previously said that he was sorry for the loss of their son; to,
      4. He didn’t say it to a detective but an officer and all the names blend so he didn’t remember which one; to
      5. He didn’t know if they were male or female because both male and female were in the room; to
      6. He couldn’t quote what he said verbatim; to,
      7. He thought the police had communicated that he was sorry for the parents’ loss; but,
      8. He didn’t remember if he told them to do so; to
      9. He was told not to talk to the parents directly; to
      10. Looking in dazed fear when BDLR asked about the text and email where he named a Reverend and Tracy Martin.

      • Jun says:

        That is not really an apology though

        That is something someone says if an acquaintance or friend loses a loved one, and they mean it

        If he was truly sorry, he would apologize for killing the kid, and actually be sincere, and just leave it at that

        but

        there is no sincere with Fogenhats anyways

        • Xena says:

          If he was truly sorry, he would apologize for killing the kid, and actually be sincere, and just leave it at that

          We know he was not sincere at all. BDLR really got his goat by starting out the question with, “After you committed this crime …” I thought GZ was going to jump out of the seat to grab BDLR.

  9. Xena says:

    How do you think the defendant will do on cross examination?

    He will lose the respect of the jury by having selected memory lapses. When GZ is not winning, he doesn’t want to play and the way to stop questioning to determine who wins and loses, for him, is to not remember.

    GZ’s first response to cross will be defensive, based on an assumption that the prosecution is trying to trip him up. His second response will be an attempt to say what he thinks the prosecutor wants to hear. His third response will be to not understand and his fourth response will be to not remember what happened, or what was said, or what he did. We get a glimpse of this from the first bond hearing where then, BDLR’s questions pertained to GZ’s statements and not evidence as it will be presented at trial.

    By his characteristics, GZ’s world is a mindset of competition. GZ’s way of winning against the competition is an effort to get others to like him because he believes favoritism decides the winner. It’s that mindset which shall cause him to emotionally explode into a cloud of anger during cross.

    • Jun says:

      I dont feel Zimmernuts will do well, and I am basing this on the first bond hearing. You can tell he was getting angry as he was starting to frown under questioning. Zimmernuts also boldly lies, forgetting comments he made earlier. Considering how Singleton and Serino worked him, they need to trap him in his lies, as that seems to work well.

      • Xena says:

        Considering how Singleton and Serino worked him, they need to trap him in his lies, as that seems to work well.

        For the prosecution to save their own sanity and the court’s time, they should repeat to GZ what he said, then ask their question. Without first bringing to his attention what he stated, he is going to play games of ring-a-round-the-rosie then later say he thought they were talking about something else.

        Also, they should not fill-in neither interrupt him when he stops in mid-sentence. That is when he is thinking how to continue lying. Let him finish. Stand there and if he doesn’t say anything after a 5 seconds or so, ask if he finished answering the question.

        I sat in on a trial where that defendant reminds me of GZ. The judge became so impatience after he stopped in mid-sentence several times that he began saying, “Please speak up. I can’t hear you.”

    • cielo62 says:

      That will be a show worth seeing!

      Sent from my iPod

  10. Malisha says:

    YeeHaah!

    Top Ten New Years Resolutions for Fogen:

    10. Get Shellie pregnant
    9. Find Shellie so I can get her pregnant
    8. Set aside some money for Joe Oliver to go get a tan
    7. Check on Frank Taaffe so he remembers to lock his doors
    6. Renew my CL license (Concealed Living)
    5. Have Sandra Osterman schedule my acquittal party next week
    4. Replace the batteries in my flashlights
    3. Sign those four thank-you notes and buy stamps
    2. Take paper-folding classes by proxy
    1. Lose weight so I can change clothes in a phone booth again, and don’t have to change clothes in a handicapped bathroom

    TOP TEN New Years Resolutions for O’Mara:

    10. Fix my left eyebrow
    9. Have videos taken of me romping with cute dogs
    8. Start watching those MMA videos produced in discovery
    7. Locate an anti-gravity expert witness who can survive voir dire
    6. Get the gum off the bottoms of my shoes
    5. Assign a “designated paralegal” to answering Cynthia Wibker’s calls and calming her down
    6. Send “Friday reports” to Dershowitz and Merritt
    5. Review my Jimmy Stewart “Harvey” tapes
    4. Practice waving arms in sophisticated manner while saying, “the officer was upset that they were fucked up the ass”
    3. File four emergency motions demanding that the charges be dropped
    2. Call in chits in order to get George Zimmerman awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor
    1. Purchase nice frames for my four thank-you notes

    • Xena says:

      I really like this one;

      1. Lose weight so I can change clothes in a phone booth again, and don’t have to change clothes in a handicapped bathroom

      But then, that would require one for O’Mara such as;
      “Give George money to buy a larger suit to wear to court.”

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      Ha! Great ones, Malisha!

      Also for George:
      1. Buy a pocket street map of the Retreat.
      2. Cut bushes in the areas of the T and dogwalk from 3′ to 1′
      3. Obtain a copy of Roget’s Thesaurus to find new synonyms for “follow” and “running.”

      For the court:
      1. Get watering can for the potted palm.

    • Malisha and You all……..I’m laughing so loud that my cats are scattering again…..TOO FUNNY!! What a hilarious way to start out the New Year……with fogen’s (and MOM’s) “resolutions”.
      A New Year of peace to all.

  11. ladystclaire says:

    Happy New Year to each and everyone of you and, may your New Year be filled with lots of Blessings as well as Love.

  12. colin black says:

    That answer above for you ..You all have thoughtfull comments ..Serrino knew through various wittness statements that a lot more words were exchanges between the Acussed an Trayvon

    An he is basicly pleading with gz to give him some thing credibles to work with

    Someting he can give to the higher ups that sounds crdible an could explain why things escellated an ended so trgicly so quickly
    An bacicly what you are feeding us does not compute.
    But gz is just to dumb to get with the programe

    He is what I call a free style liar whom basicly just wings it as he goes along.Says whatever he thinks his audience wants to hear at any given time

  13. colin black says:

    Serrino is between a rock an a hard place..He knows gz is guilty but is also aware that pressure from the brass an State Prosecuters are inclined to give this fool a pass.

    And like all of us he cant understand why Trayvon would suddenly attack gz
    He had sucsessfully evaded him an theres no credible rhyme or reason in the accuseds story that explains .The sudden unprevocked attack an frenzzied beatdow

    Serrino is basicly asking what set him of..
    Like give me something to work with I have to explain tp people.Your the good guy but people want to know .What happened he was a good kid good home not a criminal not on drugs..

    Of course gz cant explain what set him off
    Because Trayvon didnt go off it was vice verca gz went off at Trayvon.

    This line of questioning did sink into his reptillian brain though
    For when asked the same question in future he embelleshes his narative to acomadate it Buy saying Trayvon kicked of because he was incenced that he gz had called the Police on him.

    So as any normal criminal up to no good would do when aware a member of public has called in the police an gave them there location.
    Theyre not going to run to escape arrest
    No they are going to seek out the caller ambush them an proceed to beat them to death
    All the while knowing the police will arrive at any second.Because thats why your murdering this guy,An risking a bullet from the police .Or life behind bars.

  14. whonoze says:

    I have an idea for some comic relief, though I’m not feeling the creative juices to offer an entry myself right now…

    Anyone want to try to come with a David Letterman-style Top Ten list of New Years Resolutions for George Zimmerman or Mark O’Mara?

  15. colin black says:

    oops above I meant gz said in his faux hypno state after he
    Said he didnt have a problem nothing else was said.

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      🙂
      .
      Now look at this part for me, colin:

      Zimmerman: Uh, I don’t have a problem.
      Serino: At that point nothing else was said?
      Zimmerman: No, sir.
      Serino: Think. What did you say the first time he hit you?
      Zimmerman: (unintelligible)
      Serino: So there was no conversation prior. OK we’re good. Open up your eyes.
      Zimmerman: OK.
      Serino: Nothing at all.
      Zimmerman: No, sir.
      .
      .
      So, was Serino trying to find out what was being said during all the arguing that Witness 11 and Witness 18 heard but could not decipher?

      • Malisha says:

        I would love to see the first three drafts of Serino’s memo before the capias. Because I think he put in those memos what he had to make him believe that Fogen should be charged with Murder-2. And I think part of the reason that the prosecution is not concerned with all the idiotic stuff about Trayvon’s school records and the cops’ depositions and eh-beh-meh is that they HAVE quite a bit of the dialogue from the 911 tapes worked out, and they know that certain things definitely WERE said by Fogen and certain other things definitely were NOT said by Fogen. And they know that certain things were definitely NOT said by Trayvon Martin,, such as “You’re gonna die tonight” and “You got me.”

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Yes, Malisha. I agree with you….the prosecution has it down pat……they know they can “bag” gz.

  16. colin black says:

    gonna try something with you, um, that I’ve done before, it’s called, um, assisted, um, memory recall. It’s not hypnosis, it’s just something the, I mean… let’s say we try it. Would you close your eyes for me? OK, and I want you to put yourself back in the scene…Sunday night…about 7:00…you’re looking at this kid…you’re getting out of your car…talking to the dispatcher…you hang up the dispatcher…OK…give yourself a couple seconds to go ahead and think about what happened after that. (long pause) Now you’re gonna try to act like exactly what happened, OK? I’m gonna be the kid. “What the @!$%# is your problem?” You say what you said.
    Zimmerman: Uh, I don’t have a problem.
    Serino: At that point nothing else was said?
    Zimmerman: No, sir.
    Serino: Think. What did you say the first time he hit you?
    Zimmerman: (unintelligible)
    Serino: So there was no conversation prior. OK we’re good. Open up your eyes.
    Zimmerman: OK.
    Serino: Nothing at all.
    Zimmerman: No, sir.
    Serino: OK. That never works, just, you know, gotta try it though. Um…
    Zimmerman: (unintelligible)

    So they go through this get back in the momment think back .

    Q the Remember remember remeber voice sound track echcoing remember.

    I am Trayvon ..Whats your fucking major brain malfunction hommie???!!!….

    Thats it any interaction after that what set it off

    No Sir.

    What happened to the

    I dont have a problem look down

    You do now bash Bang to the nose tummble 48ft to the ground an get mounted an grounded an pounded

    Mayme Serino realy did hypnotise him an he told the truth…………..?

  17. colin black says:

    Serino: OK. 9mm inside your pants? He was mounted on you, you were able, he was mounted on your upper chest? Or, I mean, at what point were you able to free your waist side to go ahead and pull out your weapon?
    Zimmerman: When he…he was mounted on me but he had pressure on my nose and my mouth, suffocating me. And when he let go of my mouth and started reaching down my side, he said, “You’re gonna die tonight.” I didn’t need my hand any more cause he let go of my mouth. I don’t remember if I was still screaming or not. That’s when I grabbed his hand and I grabbed my, my firearm and fired. So it was one side, he let go, that I realized I didn’t need my hand and he was gonna kill me.

    So after he had his weight pressed down on gz mouth an nose smothering him
    Attempting to suffocate him .Trayvon stops the smothering an proceades to reach down for the gun.

    Genious is unsure at the point if he was still screaming???
    Like seconds prior when he was suffocateing you ?
    Then you had been screaming.
    But when he released his hand from your mouth an headed down for your gun
    Your not sure if you had continued screaming.
    Ah ok Ive got it

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      🙂

    • Cercando Luce says:

      The gun was inside his pants waistband on his right buttock. He’s saying Trayvon could see it and was feeling down for it.

      Methinks this is more transparent lie than transparent pants, although he is a bit of a Little Emperor manqué. More dog-whistles.

  18. Judt75201 says:

    Forgive me if this has been answered before (and considering the growth of your blog, it probably has), but what is your take on jury nullification? I think it is the single most powerful action a jury has, but that most do not realize it is actually a right.

    • Judt75201 says:

      And I mean this in the sence of refusing to acquit due to “reasonable doubt” even when guilt is obvious (i.e., OJ and Casey).

      • Judt75201 says:

        What I am trying to say is, juries are allowed to vote their conscience, but most people on a jury are not aware of that.

        • cielo62 says:

          IIRC juries must be impartial and use just the evidence. That “conscience” thing probably applies only in death penalty cases. This is not a death penalty case. Otherwise, what is there to vote against ones conscience?

          Sent from my iPod

  19. Rachael says:

    (a) Trayvon responded to his aggression by using more force than was reasonably necessary to defend himself;

    If Trayvon did sucker punch GZ, Perhaps it was more force than necessary – but then, he may have reasonably perceived that he was in imminent danger himself. I know I sure would have thought so if I was being followed by someone who stopped me and didn’t identify himself.

    (b) He reasonably perceived that Trayvon’s use of such force created an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury;

    It is kind of hard to get into someone’s head and know what is reasonable. *IF* someone was doing to me what GZ *claims* Trayvon was doing to him, I’m sure I would feel in imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury. One does not even need to have injuries to feel in fear of imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury (as noted above for Trayvon). However, the problem with GZ’s bodily injuries are that they do not match his story, which makes reasonable kind of fly out the window. It is not the severity (or lack of) that makes his fear of danger or death unreasonable, it is that they don’t seem to mesh at all with the story he told. And as far as someone who reasonably perceives things – remember, we are talking about someone who calls the police when he sees a “7-9” year-old black “7-9” year-old black male,4 feet tall who was walking toward an elementary school. OMG!!! Terrifying, isn’t it. He was “concerned” for his well being?” How reasonable is that? Now if it was a 3-year-old walking down the street alone, I could understand. But a 7-9 year-old? Walking toward an elementary school? Oooooohhhh sinister. It is hard to believe anything GZ would find reasonable would be found reasonable to a reasonable person. Like all the “costume” changes with respect to his “security” for thousands a week. How ‘eff’n reasonable is that? So for b, IF we were talking about a “reasonable” person to begin with, I might have a different answer, but considering it is GZ, who wouldn’t know reasonable if it bit him in the butt…

    (c) He attempted to end the confrontation and withdraw before he used deadly force.

    Considering Trayvon was crying, screaming, begging for his life and GZ STILL shot him – he “took” his gun and “aimed” it at him, all I see is evidence for murder 1.

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      Good thinking, Rachael. Yup……gz has never seemed reasonable as per the examples you have given.

      • Rachael says:

        Yeah, nothing he (GZ) did that night seems reasonable to me really.

        You see a teenager walking leisurely in the rain looking about. Is it reasonable to be concerned about that? Not really, but okay, if you really feel that concerned, call the police I guess, though I think it is overkill, but not entirely unreasonable.

        I mean dang, GZ is the kind who would feel like his life was in imminent danger if someone looks at him. How reasonable is that? In fact, he did. He told the dispatcher “he’s checking me out.” Duhhhh, wonder why. Perhaps because YOU were checking HIM out!!!!

        And if someone is checking you out, looks like he is on drugs and he reaches into his waistband, how reasonable is it to go out after him – even if it IS for an address?

        I don’t know. There is nothing about GZ that is reasonable, nothing he did that night that was reasonable (other than *perhaps* call the police – to which he totally botched and ended up in the way, killing a kid and causing the biggest crime the neighborhood had), nothing reasonable his family says or even his attorney says or does.

        And don’t EVEN get me started about the GZ supporters and their unreasonableness.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        It is almost as if gz cannot think reasonably after he initially misinterprets something. It is like a type of auto drive he cannot turn off by balancing it with logical thinking. He cannot self correct a false start……..his mind stays set like a bull after the red cape.

      • Rachael says:

        Yep – it’s like he is sinking in quicksand and everyone who tries to help him, he ends up dragging down with him.

        • Xena says:

          Yep – it’s like he is sinking in quicksand and everyone who tries to help him, he ends up dragging down with him.

          BINGO! That man is toxic.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        You certainly have that one right, Rachael.

    • Jun says:

      I believe Zimmernuts came up with that whole MMA Black Dynamite assault in case he is found as the aggressor because it does not take a rocket scientist to see he stalked and repeatedly pursued the young boy trying to get him, the defendant in an angry fashion he did…

      so knowing the law on how it works for an aggressor, he has to prove he was in imminent danger from force being used, before the aggressor could respond back

      Anyways, it is not very reasonable to say you are scared of a kid who only had skittles and ice tea and a cellphone and $40 and a kid who is not violent and is very peaceful…

      it is not reasonable to say you are scared of a person if you yell angrily on a phone call beforehand regarding a kid the defendant was stalking at the time, and then he lunged forward and started chasing a kid he scared off into the dark of the night, considering, one was going after the other, and the defendant was going after the kid, so that kind of contradicts the acts of a scared person

      When he caught Trayvon, all the kid did was ask him why Fogenhats was stalking him, and although Trayvon was scared, he simply tried to take care of the issue in a peaceful manner by initiating conversation

      Lastly, to stalk, chase, pursue, and then confront an unarmed boy, and start angrily yelling at him and then attacking him, when the kid was just trying to run away from him, is not reasonable at all, and kind of contradicts any idea that the defendant was in any reasonable fear, especially considering, the kid was trying to keep getting away from him while yelling ans screaming for help

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Good post, jun.

      • ladystclaire says:

        Jun, I so agree with the above comment as I do with all of your comments concerning this lying POS. it’s very plain and simple to the common sense person, that Fogen is the aggressor in this situation 100%. how those who support him as the victim is so unreal. he stalked Trayvon and, he should have been charged for the crime of stalking as well. but, hopefully he will be charged with that after he is tried for this murder. he had it in his mind that Trayvon was not going to get away, even though he had committed NO crime. I will always say, that he held that kid at gunpoint alnd this is why Trayvon was screaming and crying out for help and his mother. he had every intention of killing this kid and, I believe he was coached by his two mentors to do so. I wasn’t there but, I’ll bet anybody that Mark Osterman was behind the wheel of the car, that tore out of that complex at a high rate of speed.

        Fogen pulled the trigger but, in my heart of hearts I don’t believe he was alone that night.

    • Malisha says:

      considering it is GZ, who wouldn’t know reasonable if it bit him in the butt…

      IT DID! “REASONABLE” * BIT * FOGEN * IN * THE * BUTT ❗

  20. PYorck says:

    (a) Trayvon responded to his aggression by using more force than was reasonably necessary to defend himself;

    From the evidence we have seen I don’t think GZ’s ambush narrative will survive. The way I interpret the shift towards traditional self defense is that the defence won’t be able to salvage it. I would believe Deedee’s account that the aggressor GZ, who did not identify himself, tried to detain TM. Then I would consider the level of force indicated by GZ’s minor injuries justified, no matter how exactly the confrontation continued from there.

    It’s tempting to argue that what TM did can’t have been too much because apparently it was not enough, but I suspect that GZ would be able to claim that he only doubled down when TM used force to defend himself.

    (b) He reasonably perceived that Trayvon’s use of such force created an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury; and

    This depends on how on how narrowly you interpret that. I do not think that his injuries were severe enough to justify that perception. If you include TM’s overall alleged behavior then I think we may not have enough evidence to disprove that.

    (c) He attempted to end the confrontation and withdraw before he used deadly force.

    GZ has never even claimed that he did. By his own account he could talk and could have surrendered when the fight was already on the ground, but he was more interested in winning it. Whatever it is that we hear in the background of that 911 call, it sure isn’t Zimmerman surrendering.

  21. Diane says:

    (b) Did Fogen reasonably perceive that Trayvon’s use of such force created an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury to himself, to Fogen?

    I think the answer “NO” is also easy to prove because injuries that Fogen sustained were nowhere near life-threatening. If he was beaten at all, he was beaten in such a way as to do no serious damage. A fender bender would have hurt him more than the encounter with Trayvon Martin hurt him, even if both scratches on his head AND a minor injury to his nose were all attributable to contact with Trayvon Martin.

    From Fogen’s injuries, it does not seem there is matching evidence from Trayvon to suggest that the injuries were caused by Trayvon. Fogen’s blood should be on Trayvon’s hands. All evidence of a struggle can be attributed to Fogen and “the gun” which was in “the hand” of Fogen.

  22. Jun says:

    http://law.justia.com/codes/florida/2010/TitleXLVII/chapter901/901_25.html

    According this statute

    Corey followed it to a T

    Her team and the court witnessed a crime during the hearings for a second degree murder indictment

    They had her arrested, they brought Shellie to a judge of the county, they indicted her, and Corey has her team prosecute it with no unnecessary delay, since it happened during her case

    • Malisha says:

      The argument Shellie’s lawyer made about lack of jurisdiction to prosecute her is ridiculous and won’t work. If it did work, she would be reindicted in a quick minute before the statute of limitations ran out. So that’s not a problem. But the lawyer did it, in my opinion, because they’re trying to buy time. Nobody now knows where Shellie is, do they? My bet is that she is not with Fogen. My bet is that something will happen and it is, possibly, too complex for us to guess at, but it does not involve the possibility that Shellie will actually go to trial on a felony charge in Seminole County, Florida.

      • Jun says:

        you think she will try to work out a deal?

      • Malisha says:

        I think Shellie’s in a tight spot. I wonder if she wants to leave him, because I can guess that he is very abusive nowadays and there’s nobody but Shellie to abuse. But I kind of think she was in the car with him at the beginning of the festivities on 2/26/2012. The reason I believe that is the small clip in the car when Fogen is getting ready to do the re-enactment on 2/27/2012. Fogen is waving his hands around in front of him, which he does when he is making up lies and showing how very credible he is. And he waved his pudgy hands toward the right-front windshield when he was describing where he parked, where he saw Trayvon, what he saw, and he said, “My wife… I … ” and then he continued. He was on the verge of saying something like, “My wife said ‘there he goes’ and I got out of the car…”

        If Shellie leaves Fogen, can he roll over on her and tell something that makes trouble for her?

        And by the same token, does Shellie have a lot that she could use to make trouble for Fogen? (Just think, “he uses the N-word all the time at home”) — but would she dare?

        Would Fogen dare? It may be that these two deserve each other and that they will be suitably punished by having each other, at least for a while.

        All the associated crimes besides murder, however, such as conspiracy and stalking and so forth, probably do have statutes of limitations on them. Perhaps after Shellie’s “statutes run” she will say or do something different from what she’s saying and doing now — if she’s even still in the picture and hasn’t already flown the proverbial coop.

  23. Xena says:

    I’m late and have catching-up to do. Sorry. What I would like to address is the following:

    O’Mara announced at a press conference that he will argue that the defendant could not withdraw before using deadly force because the defendant was lying on his back unable to withdraw with Trayvon straddling him raining down blows MMA style and slamming his head into the concrete sidewalk.

    This is contradicted by GZ’s own words. According to him, he was able to wiggle/shimmy. That conveys ability to physically move. IOWs, Trayvon’s weight and position was not physically pinning GZ down.

    GZ alleged that he physically moved his head from the concrete to the grass and in doing so, his jacket raised exposing his gun. Thus, he was no longer in danger of having his head bashed on concrete. It also provides evidence that he was physically free from his hips up.

    Most importantly, the injuries that O’Mara wants to rely on as placing GZ in imminent harm of losing his life had all occurred before, and were no longer occurring, when GZ shot and killed Trayvon.

    Being free from the waist up, and no longer in danger of having his bashed on concrete, GZ then creates another condition that he felt threatened his life; i.e., he “felt” that Trayvon saw his gun. However, Trayvon didn’t go directly for the gun but rather, crossed his right arm over his left arm and ran his right hand down the right-side of GZ’s chest where GZ restrained Trayvon in a “wrist lock.” (This physical description being demonstrated by GZ when he took the voice stress test.)

    Based on GZ’s demonstration, Trayvon’s left arm would be pinned/restrained underneath his right-arm therefore, not having ability to use either. Effectively, at the moment when GZ shot and killed Trayvon, Trayvon was the one who was restrained by GZ.

    GZ also describes how he was able to move his left hand out of the path of his aim, did aim, and shoot.

    IMO, O’Mara is going to have a very difficult time convincing the jury that GZ was pinned and unable to remove himself from the situation.

    Then we have forensics that dispute GZ’s story of being pinned and beaten.

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      You have it down exactly, Xena.
      By the way, do you think I might be off base about that eye movement question I had above?

      • Be careful. That eye movement stuff is junk science.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Thanks. It is great to have you and the others here to keep me from go down a wrong path.

      • Xena says:

        By the way, do you think I might be off base about that eye movement question I had above?

        Sorry, I’m moving pretty fast this evening and have to post this so I’ll know where it lands and can read your comment above it. 🙂

      • Xena says:

        @You all have ….

        By the way, do you think I might be off base about that eye movement question I had above?

        Sorry. I can’t find it. Feel free to shoot it at me. 🙂

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        No need now, Xena, because Prof. Leatherman has already steered me away from pursuing it any further.

      • Malisha says:

        The eye movement stuff is junk science but I think Serino was doing it on purpose just to keep Fogen talking and to keep Fogen engaged in a mysterious law enforcement process so Fogen would begin to feel more and more entitled to spout off his oh-so-interesting law enforcement theories of why “the suspect” did whatever he said “the suspect” did. I think it was Serino playing at being “Jane” from the “Mentalist” show. I still think we should give Serino a second look-see, especially in view of his three drafts before the one that was accepted on March 13 to give rise to his capias.

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      And a great Happy New Year to you, Xena!

    • gbrbsb says:

      Very clever, Xena, just turn the tables on him; from this in all of the stages GZ´s own actions, as per his own story, take him out of the alleged danger and into control! I haven´t had the time these last days to reply to your long reply 2 threads back but this makes such a lot of sense. May I just add that Trayvon not only did not directly go for GZ´s gun, a lunge say which would seem more normal in the middle of a fray, nor did he just run his right hand down GZ´s right side, a contortionistic move if at the same time trying to control GZ´s arms, body and legs, no, according to GZ Trayvon even announced his intentions, as IIRC, GZ quoted in one of his versions Trayvon saying “Oh, you gotta piece!” following with “you´re going to die tonight MF”.

      • Xena says:

        May I just add that Trayvon not only did not directly go for GZ´s gun, a lunge say which would seem more normal in the middle of a fray, nor did he just run his right hand down GZ´s right side, a contortionistic move …

        Yep. It had puzzled me as to why GZ did not say that Trayvon just went for the gun.

        There are reasons for his lies.

        You know, in the Dooley case, there were witnesses who said James went for Dooley’s gun. The jury decided that James had a right to because Dooley threatened James with it.

        • gbrbsb says:

          I´m not sure GZ had a concrete reason for each lie or whether it was his general embellishment and exaggeration believing the more details he added the more credible. Children do this as well as compulsive liars so for me it´s a toss up which cap fits. The fact he lied to MO, supposedly his only friend, about graduating shows lying is a part of him.

          • Xena says:

            The fact he lied to MO, supposedly his only friend, about graduating shows lying is a part of him.

            That was GZ’s lie because of shame. He lies a lot because of shame and his own fears.

    • Xena…..If fogen had been on his back unable to move while Travon was supposedly “beating” him….what was fogen doing with HIS hands and arms all that time? After all, Trayvon didn’t have fogen in a wrist lock. If it had been me, I would have been trying to scratch or punch my way out with whatever I had in me. With fogen’s knowledge of police self-defense, it’s hard to believe that he just lay there taking “a beating” with his arms outstreached like fronds on a potted palm. I don’t believe he has ever stated that he tried to fight back using his hands/fists. When someone is brutally attacked, don’t the police usually take scrapings from under the victims nails (to test for DNA) because the victim has, most likely, put up a fight against her/his attacker? Trayvon showed no marks/scratches that someone tried to fight back against him…no scratches on Trayvon’s face from someone trying to defend themselves against him.

      • Xena says:

        Xena…..If fogen had been on his back unable to move while Travon was supposedly “beating” him….what was fogen doing with HIS hands and arms all that time?

        Singleton caught on to that too, and asked him after the re-enactment if he had any defensive wounds or bruises. That is when she lifted his shirt sleeve and we see the gang tattoo. GZ told her that his jacket protected him. Yeah, sure, like you say, no one just lays back and takes a beating. Not once in any of his stories does he say that he deflected any punches with his arms. That’s because no punches were thrown by Trayvon.

      • cielo62 says:

        COOL! I like what you did there “fronds on a potted palm”.

        Sent from my iPod

      • Malisha says:

        Oh yes, Grey, I commented on that back in April on the Jonathan Turley thread. Fogen has it that he took a punch in the nose, swatted around (or didn’t swat around) tiger-paw style, then fell on his dumpy rump, THEN “somehow” Trayvon “mounted” him, and grabbed his head, and “tried to” — “started” smashing his head into the sidewalk and punching him MMA style in his face, and throughout all that, Fogen has — “LOOK, MA, NO HANDS!”

        Fogen has no hands, no arms, no elbows. He can shimmy, but that’s all he can do. He can scream “Help me Help me” but that’s all he can do.

        THEN when the jacket rise and the Trayvon-view and the “oh yeah now I remember I have a gun” things happen, at that very moment, miraculously, God gives Fogen two hands, two arms, two elbows, ten fingers, and — intent.

        If you remember his explanation of how he managed to get the gun out of his holster on his hip under his pants while lying on his back being beaten, here it is: TRAYVON took HIS hand off my mouth (“thus freeing MY HANDS” is implied but not even stated) so I…

        How does Trayvon taking HIS hands off Fogen’s mouth free up Fogen’s hands?

        Oops, here’s what we have: Fogen had HIS hands on Trayvon’s mouth, just as he slipped up and said and demonstrated in the re-enactment. When he took one hand off Trayvon’s mouth, he reached for his gun, and when aiming, was careful to not shoot his OTHER hand (which was holding Trayvon by the hoodie) while he fired one shot.

        Fogen had “no hands” during the whole beating because the whole beating was a fabrication. Fogen’s hands were busy restraining, trying to silence, and then killing Trayvon Martin.

      • Malisha says:

        This video from LLMPapa shows the “Look Ma No Hands” version of the beating best. It is hard to imagine that even a 70-year-old grandma would be flapping her hands around like that while a thug beat her up, ain’t?

        And then, he gets his hand free when and why? When = “when Trayvon took his one hand off Fogen’s mouth” and why? = because that’s when Trayvon said, “You’re gonna die tonight MF.”

        Fogen really does sound like a small child making up a whopper when he tells his story, doesn’t he? Only with a small child making up a whopper, you say to them: “OK you need to take a time-out and we’ll talk later,” to make them stop their embarrassing blabbermouthing.

      • Thanks Malisha for the explaination. I got into this case late..June or July….and unfortunately, I can’t download videos on my geriatric dial-up computer….heck, when this site starts to reach 350 comments or so, it causes my browser to shut down……..lol That’s why I rely on the comments of others regarding the video evidence…..it’s much appreciated too!

  24. Jun says:

    Fogenhats instigated the whole encounter by targeting and stalking and pursuing a young boy in the dark of the night, even after being told it was unnecessary…

    and the victim was simply trying to get away from the defendant all night

    On top of that, the defendant once he caught up with the victim began the attack as the victim simply tried to talk his way out of the situation

    The victim is a young boy who does not know how to fight and only had Skittles, a cellphone, Ice Tea, and $40 on him, hence he was not a threat to anyone

    Since the fight was unnecessary and avoidable, and the perceived reasonability to stalk and chase and terrorize the boy is unreasonable, any fear that came forth is unreasonable as well for the defendant because the only person in any reasonable danger through the whole incident was the victim

    The defendant never tried to avoid and walk away from the encounter, and this is proven by the fact he kept pursuing the boy and then began acting in a threatening aggressive manner once he caught the boy and began attacking the boy

    I think it is even safe to say the victim never used any force at all and simply yelled for help before being shot and asphyxiated by the defendant as there is no forensic evidence of any force being used by the victim onto the defendant

    • cielo62 says:

      Jun~ that pretty much sums up the prosecutions opening statement. Short, sweet and ready to destroy GZs weak stories.

      ________________________________

      • Jun says:

        This is a copy and paste but here it is

        Today I figured I would cover the chase Trayvon Martin’s killer did to him, Cheorge Zimmernuts…

        Here is the evidence we have

        (1) Cheorge’s own phone call with police – it is very clear on the phone call Cheorge was stalking Trayvon and had ill will towards him. He provided evidence himself by stalking the kid and describing him to police, calling Trayvon an asshole who always gets away, a fucking coon/punk, then says “shit, he’s running” and proceeds to get out of his car and go after the kid. It was so clear what Cheorge was doing even the dispatch figured that he was stalking the kid, & tells him to stand down. Cheorge obviously refuses and continues his chase and stalking. Cheorge mentions 3 times that Trayvon is running away from him. The call ends at around 7:13:43pm.

        (2) Trayvon’s cell phone records prove that he was having a conversation with his girlfriend, who is codenamed Deedee (to protect her, and the reasons are many, as you may have seen the stalking and harassment and attempted intimidation from the Zimmernuts). Trayvon relays what he is doing and tells her of a creepy man stalking him. Trayvon runs for it and lets Deedee know. Trayvon is down the back pathway heading home, thinking he lost the creepy man Cheorge Zimmernuts, and starts walking back home. On part of the call, Trayvon relays that the creepy stalker is back and Trayvon continues to try to get away before being worn out and cut off and confronted by the creepy man. Deedee advises him to continue running but Trayvon says he is worn out and asks why the creepy man keeps stalking him. The confrontation begins.

        (3) There is a clubhouse video where I believe they are going to use the lights and video software to enhance what they are seeing. It is to show the general direction they are heading.

        (4) Witness 1 notes that she heard a kid making a weird noise and then heard a shot go off. She places the location of her testimony of what happened down south on the back pathway. This corroborates Deedee’s testimony and also adds more evidence that Cheorge continued stalking Trayvon. Her attributing the noises to a kid is also evidence that Trayvon was the one in danger, as he is the kid.

        (5) Witness 2 testifies that she heard and glanced at a chase that happened from the south, heading north toward the T. She heard yells for help, like a No No No or a Yo Yo Yo, and the screaming was ended with a gun shot. This also corroborates both witness 1, and Deedee’s testimony.

        (6) Witness 3 stated that she saw a man in a white top on top of another person and she heard screams for help and immediately called police. She states that the screams for help were halted with the gunshot. This is evidence that the screams of help were because of the fear of being killed by a gun, and then the screams were ended with the gun shot. This also adds to the evidence and corroborates the other 2 witnesses.

        (7) Witness 18 saw the encounter from the confrontation onward. She clearly notes by the tones of the voices that the aggressor was the adult, Cheorge Zimmernuts. She attributes screams for help to that of a young boy. She says that Cheorge was on top, killed the kid, ended the screaming with a gun shot, and simply rose up off the top of the kid. She can place where the confrontation instigated and where it moved to for the actual killing in the murder.

        (8.) Considering that Trayvon’s body was found about 63 feet south of the T, and to the west of the backpath way on the grass, head facing north, and the shell casing in a position where the shooter was facing north, along with a debris field south of the dead body, and the witnesses, the chase was started from Zimmerman’s car, then south down the back pathway, and then Zimmerman herded Trayvon north, and confronted him, instigated a struggle and then killed the kid. Zimmerman is clearly the aggressor.

        There you have it folks…. there’s more evidence of the chase but I figured I would just hit the strong points

        What the witnesses saw began from a southern point on the back pathway so pretty much, the defendant had to have continued pursuit if he was witnessed south of his car and fairly distant from his vehicle, and then from the south point moving north… besides even w8 swears testimony of the stalking by the defendant

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      Jun, the following could also perhaps work if we consider the tactical flashlight and phone falling a bit south at the end of the struggle. (This would eliminate your having to assert that gz tossed his keychain by the tree after he got up and walked away from Trayvon’s body.)
      This is also a repost of my earlier post:
      .
      .
      George’s PATH–
      l. George tells dispatcher, “He ran” and immediately gives chase ON THE T because he thinks he can intercept Trayvon on RVC at end of T.
      2. When George does not see Trayvon at RVC, he turns right (south) toward the back gate. George turns right to go west between the first and second building [from the T]
      3. When George meets up with Trayvon upon George’s arrival at the backyard area, George chases Trayvon north.
      .
      Trayvon’s PATH–
      l. Trayvon walks TTL from the mailboxes to the north side of George’s vehicle.
      2. At that point Trayvon runs north between the buildings to RVC.
      3. Trayvon arrives at the cut between the buildings that goes to the T.
      4. Trayvon goes between those buildings to the dogwalk.
      5. Trayvon continues south on the dogwalk to the end of the first building where the two of them meet up.
      .
      .
      1. Witness 2 says she saw 2 figures (later she says 1) running past her kitchen window toward the T. [just a blur, but that is enough–a nearsighted person can see that much without glasses]
      2. If Trayvon cuts west followed by George, that would put them at the side of Witness 11′s house where Witness 11 first heard the voices before they bent around going south passed the back of her townhouse.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Here is another repost of a comment I made on Newsvine:
        .
        .

        Let’s focus on George Zimmerman’s keychain with the flashlight attached.

        In my opinion, its location at the crime scene ……on the T side of that well known tree…….is all that is needed to defeat George’s claim to SYG or George’s claim to self defense.

        All the other evidence……. all of George’s statements both in audio and video interviews……..all of the other evidence is simply icing on the cake for the prosecution.

        The keychain clinches the case!

        Why?

        Because the keychain marks the location where George should have stayed. The fact that the keychain’s light was still on is an extra gift to the prosecution. It was in use!

        Trayvon’s body was found a good 30+ feet south of that keychain. Trayvon was trying to escape toward home.

        What did George do? George pursued Trayvon. No valid self defense there.

        George should have gone in the opposite direction. Had everything gone north toward the T from the keychain, George might today have some chance at a self defense claim because north would have shown that George was attempting to retreat.

        But….no. George was on the offense. He headed SOUTH of the keychain after Trayvon as Trayvon attempted to get away toward home. He just would not let go of Trayvon……..he would not let Trayvon go home.

        The keychain with its flashlight is solid, physical evidence.

        The keychain ALONE defeats George’s self defense claim.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Of course, Lonnie, Malisha and others have done an even better job above here of proving that gz has no case for a self defense claim.

      • Jun says:

        That is why in the reenactment video, Fogenhats stared desperately south down the backpathway because he realizes his story is not being sold so he makes up the fly swatting tiger swipes

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        You are correct about that, Jun.
        Also, Trayvon himself could have been making those motions if he had been trying to release himself from George’s hold on the back of his sweatshirt.

  25. Ty Flair says:

    Professor great post,if you could one day,could you put back on your defense hat,an pretend you was fogen lawyer. How would you try to get him out of this. The reason I ask is that I can prepare myself for the lies O’Mara will try to throw out there. This case is like a fiction movie, its makes you sad an then angry,its puts a smile on your face to see him get lock up,then it make you angry again when he get bail,it makes you cry to see the family pain. I just hope it have a great ending.

  26. You all have thoughtful comments says:

    Could Serino actually have been looking at George’s eye movement during the following?
    .
    .
    Serino: OK. And that’s why, like I’m saying, you know, I mean, ih, uh…I’m gonna try something with you, um, that I’ve done before, it’s called, um, assisted, um, memory recall. It’s not hypnosis, it’s just something the, I mean… let’s say we try it. Would you close your eyes for me? OK, and I want you to put yourself back in the scene…Sunday night…about 7:00…you’re looking at this kid…you’re getting out of your car…talking to the dispatcher…you hang up the dispatcher…OK…give yourself a couple seconds to go ahead and think about what happened after that. (long pause) Now you’re gonna try to act like exactly what happened, OK? I’m gonna be the kid. “What the @!$%# is your problem?” You say what you said.
    Zimmerman: Uh, I don’t have a problem.
    Serino: At that point nothing else was said?
    Zimmerman: No, sir.
    Serino: Think. What did you say the first time he hit you?
    Zimmerman: (unintelligible)
    Serino: So there was no conversation prior. OK we’re good. Open up your eyes.
    Zimmerman: OK.
    Serino: Nothing at all.
    Zimmerman: No, sir.
    Serino: OK. That never works, just, you know, gotta try it though. Um…
    Zimmerman: (unintelligible)
    Serino: Well if we’re gonna make it, I mean but if it puts you back at the scene…It’s just that, I mean, as far as work, as far as stuff that actually gets recalled during that, you know…It’s a, it’s an old, old technique and whatever but, you know, it’s usually the clinical thing, but…um…OK. I gotta talk to a couple people real quick and I’ll be right back and…why don’t you come with me. You OK here?
    .
    .
    .
    And would eye movement or lack of it when George’s eyes were closed have told Serino anything?

  27. roderick2012 says:

    “How do you think the defendant will do on cross examination?”

    There isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell that GZ will testify at either the immunity hearing( if there is one) nor at the main trial.

    The only reason that O’Mara would push for an immunity hearing would be to see the type of case the prosecution will present during the trial. Otherwise there is no way that GZ will take the stand unless Judge Nelson allows GZ to testify without being cross-examined. Of course O’Mara will ask and be slapped down firmly and quickly.

    • Malisha says:

      The kind of case the prosecution has for trial was already described in the first bond hearing. “We have his [Fogen’s] statements, we have the shell casing, and we have Mr. Martin’s body.”

    • ladystclaire says:

      He would be stupid enough to ask Judge Nelson if his murdering client can take the stand but, not be cross-examined by the state. he was dumb enough to do it once before. this man has no defense for Fogen and to that I say, too darn bad!

    • but in a immunity hearing it’s the defendants burden to prove he killed an unarmed teenager in self defense. so he can’t just sit there and look stupid he’s gotta say something stupid too!! LOLOL i just made myself laugh!!LOL

    • Jun says:

      I did not understand until I came upon this blog

      but Zimmernuts screwed himself regarding the hearsay rule

      I also find it funny that Omara was publicly fussin in the media that he would get the trial in the new year around June and ask for a SYG hearing in the same year in April…

      then the judge sets it to what Omara publicly states, and then Omara does not want to take the offer and asks for a continuance LOL

      Why ask for something and then not want it when it is offered?

      Lastly, even if Zimmernuts did testify without cross examination… his statements would automatically be struck off as hearsay because for statements to not be hearsay, they have to be subject to cross examination during a trial and be sworn under oath…

      so I do not see the point of Omara asking for that because Zimmernut’s statements would not count anyways without cross examination

      I honestly feel Zimmernuts would stand up and testify,,, I mean this is the same guy who signed a Miranda waiver and then proceeded to give numerous contradicting and inconsistent statements and outright lies… this is the same guy, whom after being told by the jailhouse phone calls that the calls are recorded, proceeds to lay out all his plans and spoke in a primitive code, and then thought by structuring his money, he could hide it

      • Jun said,

        “Lastly, even if Zimmernuts did testify without cross examination… his statements would automatically be struck off as hearsay because for statements to not be hearsay, they have to be subject to cross examination during a trial and be sworn under oath…”

        That is an incorrect statement of the hearsay rule.

        However, you are correct to say that the Court will strike the testimony of a witness who refuses to be cross examined.

    • Malisha says:

      O’Mara: Your Honor, we would like to put defendant on the stand because only he really knows what happened that night in Sanford when the young man passed.

      Judge: Go ahead, swear him in.

      O’Mara: I said we would LIKE TO. But we have one condition: that he not be cross-examined.

      Judge: Under what theory, I’m not seeing a law for that. I have the Sixth Amendment here, and the Bible, and a complete set of the Golden Books. Where is the “testimony without cross examination” law?

      O’Mara: Well Your Honor, the police in Sanford have indicated in each and every one of their depositions that they would be very upset if the defendant were to be cross-examined; that is why they were so careful in their original interrogation of him at the police station. He prefers to say whatever comes into his head and have it taken at face value.

      Judge: Let me get this straight, you want “whatever comes into his head” to be taken “at face value”?

      O’Mara: Yes Your Honor. I have an emergency motion here.

      Judge: Oh. Well in that case, OK, go ahead.

      BDLR: Your Honor, I object. That’s not due process!

      Judge: It’s all right, counsel. So long as defendant is a decent American I see no reason to require him to process his hair. He likes to wear it “au naturel” and that’s OK with the Court; we do not discriminate. Proceed.

  28. ladystclaire says:

    I was reading the article over on Essence magazine’s site and, I must say that I don’t understand why these blog sites allow this hate speech to be posted. it’s real sad to see just how some white people in this country, can be so heartless to speak so ill about a murdered child and his family. can they not support this POS without all of the hate that they exhibit?

    I pray that this trial starts on time and, that Fogen is put away for a nice long spell. it wouldn’t bother me if they lock him up for the rest of his life. if and when he is convicted and sentenced, we had all better prepare for the *racist whites* to *RIOT* because, they have been known to do so. they will also amp up the Klan as well while marching through the streets. these people really lack morals and, that’s the honest GOD’S truth.

    • i know how the mind boggles. the sick, twisted comments are stunning no matter how many times you see them.

      but i 12-15 assholes that continuously make those comments on the blogs are not going to do shit when the murderer is convicted. they use that rhetoric on us when they say we’ll all start riots if he got off.

      i just keep in mind that the evidence is too strong for anything but a swift guilty verdict and then the life sentence. once he’s put away all the minions will go back under their favorite rock.
      after all no one likes to be associated with a loser, not even other losers.

      • Xena says:

        i just keep in mind that the evidence is too strong for anything but a swift guilty verdict and then the life sentence.

        Know what I find completely ridiculous? The Zidiots read blogs such as this one to find out what evidence and legal procedures are being discussed. Then they go to news article comments or the treeslum, and make an excuse for GZ that is unlike his own stories. IOWs, they can’t use his own stories to defend against the evidence. LOL!

        • well i kinda can’t blame them for that, how are they supposed to remember all his excuses?
          po thangs can’t even stick up for their idiot properly.

          they might wanna make those little word cards like i do to teach my kindergartener sight words- you know with the index cards?

          According to GZ,
          Trayvon:
          said “i’m gonna get you sucka”
          said “you gonna die sucka”
          said “you got me sucka”

          • Xena says:

            well i kinda can’t blame them for that, how are they supposed to remember all his excuses?
            po thangs can’t even stick up for their idiot properly.

            LOL!! Actually, I don’t think Zidiots know what he said because they are only concerned with what Trayvon purportedly said and did. Which leads to your flash cards ….

            According to GZ,
            Trayvon:
            said “i’m gonna get you sucka”
            said “you gonna die sucka”
            said “you got me sucka”

            And the Zidiots will say that Trayvon said all three and one you left out; i.e., “Yo, whitey!”

    • Jun says:

      I think it is because of workload and trolls working overtime

      A magazine like Essence is really popular so they may be inundated with spam and hate speech

      • Xena says:

        I think it is because of workload and trolls working overtime

        @Jun. Trust me on this. It’s because the Zidiots believe that anything directed towards a Black audience gives them right to disrespect and violate that source as a response to equal rights.

        They have no interest in the variety of articles and advertisers in Essence, just like they have no interest on HuffPost Black Voices other than GZ’s case — but they are not racists, uh??!!!!

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Daralene Jones‏@DaraleneJones
        Hmmm…next jail call is in Spanish. My photographer helping me interpret. Sounds like ‪#GeorgeZimmerman‬ talking to his brother

        Pia Malbran‏@PiaMalbran
        In jail call, Zimmerman asks “What is a White Hispanic?” He says: “No hay nada blanco de mí.” Translation: “There’s nothing White about me.”

        Gio Benitez, CBS‏@GioBenitez
        : Zimmerman jail call (Spanish): “… this could have been avoided if my parents would have given me a proper Latino name.”

        • cielo62 says:

          It may come as a shock to GZ but he IS “white”. Race is what it is. “Hispanic” is just his cultural background. I hope someone has rxplained that to him by now.

          Sent from my iPod

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Even though George writes “white Hispanic” on ID forms….sometimes [when it suits him or a situation] he wants to be all Hispanic or all white.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Other times, he likes to distinguish his Latino roots from the Latino roots of Mexicans.

      • Malisha says:

        HA HA! Fogen believes that he would not have been arrested if his name was “Jorge”?

        Yeah, that makes sense. No law enforcement officers would ever arrest a guy named Jorge. Unless of course you mean Jorge Pita, Ponce, Rodriguez, Amador, Camina, Suarez, Diaz, Sanchez, Soler, Lopez, Peguero, Davila, Moreno, Martinez, Salon, Perez, Cartaya, Acosta, Mouzon, Palenzuela, Pumar, Reyes, Acuna, Reyna, Santiago, Figueroa or…

        I mean, Jorge, the list goes on and on. All those mothers who tried to protect their sons from false arrest just by naming them “Jorge” and it didn’t work! What is this world coming to, I am asking you? ❗ QUE LASTIMA ❗

  29. whonoze says:

    And the beat goes on:

    (from the Orlando Sentinal, 11/6/2012)

    “Voters in Seminole and Brevard counties Tuesday chose a long-time manager from the office of retiring State Attorney Norm Wolfinger as his successor.

    With all but a few precincts reporting, Phil Archer, a 52-year-old Republican from Titusville, held a commanding lead, capturing 58 percent of the vote to 42 percent for Democrat Ryan Vescio of Oviedo, a 33-year-old prosecutor from the Orange-Osceola State Attorney’s Office.”

    A small side note to the Martin case. Vescio had been endorsed by John Wright, the private investigator who was hired by W18’s attorney to take her long written statement that appears in the discovery documents, after she felt blown-off by Chris Serino and wanted to get her testimony on the record,

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      That is quite interesting about John Wright.

      Thanks for this update, whonoze.

    • whonoze says:

      Folks may be interested in Vescio’s views on SYG and on Wolfinger’s mysterious “conflict of interest” withdrawal from the Martin case. Both can be found on his campaign’s WordPress blog, which is still up as I write:

      http://votevescio.wordpress.com/issues/

      The SYG comments are at the top. The critique of Wolfinger critique is 7 items down. Excerpts:

      “Today, I am calling on Norm Wolfinger to release any and all correspondence and reveal to the public any conversations he and the State Attorney’s Office of Brevard and Seminole County has had with Governor Rick Scott, Attorney General Pam Bondi and their staff members as to his reasons for ducking this case and sending those looking for justice elsewhere.”

      “Let’s be honest. Incompetence is not a conflict of interest, and barring some sort of relationship between the State Attorney’s Office and one of the parties here, the truth is that the either the Governor felt the need to step in or the State Attorney’s Office realized they could not fairly bring justice in this case.”

      And this guy lost by 16 points to one of Wolfinger’s proteges.

      “Forget it, Jake. It’s Florida.”

    • cielo62 says:

      Disgusting but not surprising. The GOP-washed masses will always vote GOP, reagrdless of the harm they do themselves or others. They think that is called “Loyalty.” In reality, it’s called “Lunacy.”   We must remain poised to raise another stink of THIS replacement tries to stand in the way of justice.

      ________________________________

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Wonder if the FBI will be able to discover what the conflict of interest was for Wolfinger.

        I agree with your comments, cielo.

  30. colin black says:

    Sorry I read your post an Malishas excellent on point by point answers…Three No no no defendant is screwed

    Ive often said maybe here or another site.GZ never once gave advance warning he was armed.Let alone Im going to sgoot if you bont desist.By his own words he shouted for help often

    But not one breath did he wast on a warning.

    I never answered last night because Malisha had already said all I would have.Only better an without the rambling.

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      I love this section of the interview:
      .
      .
      Zimmerman: And he kept punching me, and then, when I started yelling for help, that’s when he grabbed my head and started to slam it.
      Serino: Grabbed your head by your ears, by…hard to say?
      Zimmerman: I don’t remember.
      Serino: OK.
      Zimmerman: Every time he punched my nose, it just…
      Serino: How many times, OK, how many times you get punched in the nose? A couple, few?
      Zimmerman: I don’t know, I don’t remember.
      Serino: OK, you never got a chance to hit him, you have no defense wounds here, um, any bruising on your body at all?
      Zimmerman: Ah, no.
      .
      .
      AND
      .
      .
      Serino: That’s why we’re here today. Once again, these can be interpreted as capillary-type cuts or whatever, lacerations, uh, not really, um, coinciding with being slammed hard into the ground. OK? That’s skull fractures is you happen with that. I’ve seen ‘em all, you know. Me, I reserve judgment

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        And also, this part:
        .
        .
        Serino: OK. 9mm inside your pants? He was mounted on you, you were able, he was mounted on your upper chest? Or, I mean, at what point were you able to free your waist side to go ahead and pull out your weapon?
        Zimmerman: When he…he was mounted on me but he had pressure on my nose and my mouth, suffocating me. And when he let go of my mouth and started reaching down my side, he said, “You’re gonna die tonight.” I didn’t need my hand any more cause he let go of my mouth. I don’t remember if I was still screaming or not. That’s when I grabbed his hand and I grabbed my, my firearm and fired. So it was one side, he let go, that I realized I didn’t need my hand and he was gonna kill me.
        Serino: How long did he suffocate you for?
        Zimmerman: (sigh) Felt like…
        Serino: Seemed like forever, I’m sure.
        Zimmerman: Felt like hours, but I don’t…

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        George does not do well when he opens his mouth.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        LOL! That’s great, Professor!

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Good question, Cielo! 🙂

    • Malisha says:

      Fogen to Serino (on how long Trayvon “suffocated” him): I don’t know, It seemed like hours.

      Fogen to Hannity (on the pulling of “the gun” and shooting, which was done at the time he just got finished being “suffocated” by Trayvon’s hands: I don’t know, It all happened so fast.

  31. Lonnie Starr says:

    (a) Did Trayvon respond to Fogen’s aggression by
    using more force than was reasonably necessary
    to defend himself?
    ———————————————————
    ———————————————————

    There is no evidence of Trayvon Martin using any force against GZ.
    The only witness who claimed to have seen any force being used
    was caused to retract his statements, because the evidence indicate
    otherwise so grossly, he himself might have become a suspected
    co-conspirator, had he not retracted.

    Thus, GZ will have to take the stand to make such an assertion, because no one witness will do it for him. But, if he does, his credibility problem will impeach him, making his testimony ineffective.
    ———————————————————
    ———————————————————

    (b) Did Fogen reasonably perceive that Trayvon’s use
    of such force created an imminent danger of death
    or serious bodily injury to himself, to Fogen?
    ———————————————————
    ———————————————————

    NOPE AGAIN!!!

    The evidence shows that when the shot was fired, GZ was
    holding TM with a superior grip on his clothing. That means,
    that GZ was not under any kind of attack at all. You cannot
    devote one hand to holding someone by the clothing, while
    they are waging a life threatening attack on your person.
    You need both hands to prevent a deadly blow from being
    struck.

    If you can devote one hand to hold another persons clothing,
    by a center chest hold, you are indicating that you are safe,
    secure and superior to them. This is what the Gunshot
    trajectory shows was occurring at the time the shot was fired.
    So, GZ was assaulting Trayvon with only one of his hands,
    while with his other hand he was making ready a deadly assault
    with a fire arm.

    The ballistic evidence will show that GZ was not on the ground and/or pinned as he is trying to claim, and he therefore could have retreated.
    Or, he could have given a warning. Or he could have identified
    himself. Or he could have done both. Instead he did neither.

    At no time did GZ attempt to end the hostilities. At no time did
    Trayvon perform any hostile acts. While GZ displayed both
    sinister hostility and anger at Trayvon, for no good reason at all.
    ———————————————————
    ———————————————————

    (c) Did Fogen attempt to end the confrontation
    and withdraw before he used deadly force?
    ———————————————————
    ———————————————————

    No, he did not, he did not give any warning, he did not
    identify himself. He did not release Trayvon’s clothing.
    He did not attempt to push him away. Trayvon was
    not armed. Trayvon did not attempt to gain control of
    GZ’s weapon. GZ had total control of his weapon, and
    yet GZ did not take any action that a reasonable person,
    seeking to protect the neighborhood from criminals would
    take. Contrary even to the the rules he had been taught
    in the 14 hour Neighborhood Watch course he had been
    required to take by SPD.
    ———————————————————
    ———————————————————

    In conclusion, GZ went from anger to action. His angry
    hostile acts of aggression, frightened his quarry and terrorized
    him, even without GZ knowing who he was, or that he had
    done anything other than be a youthful black child walking in
    the rain. As a powerfully built and aggressive angry adult, who had experience as a bar room bouncer and a combat ready security service “muscle” for hire, he well out stripped the capacities of the youthful and inexperienced “mama’s boy” Trayvon, to defend himself. On top of which GZ had taken special pains to arm himself with a gun, and extra deadly “sure kill” ammunition. Clearly GZ came prepared to meet any resistance any stranger could offer.

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      Superb, Lonnie…..and we can let Frank Taaffe set the scene:

      [“I think he had fed-up issues. He was mad as hell and wasn’t going to take it anymore.”]

    • seallison says:

      Lonnie – short and o-so sweet. Beautiful.

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      Whether or not gz knows it, Frank Taaffe has basically washed his hands of gz and gz’s NW.

      [ “I think any time you use a weapon, there are certain anger issues working.”—Taaffe]
      .
      .
      Taaffe told the FBI that he “knew George Zimmerman to be a member of the community NWP, but xxxx (Taaffe) did not know
      Zimmerman on a personal level.”

      Taaffe also said “he stopped participating in the NWP program” about Christmas 2011 although he “did not advise anyone of his decision to stop participating in the NWP, because it was so loosely affiliated there was no one to tell.”
      .
      I wonder if gz realizes that Taaffe was basically saying, “This is your mess, gz……you are on your own.”

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        The real message from Taaffe is the above and NOT the “tours” he gives to explain and appear to be supporting George.

      • cielo62 says:

        Wow. An amazingly good idea. Get out of GZs toxic universe before it claims more of your life.

        Sent from my iPod

      • Malisha says:

        Here’s what I think Taaffe was saying by his narrative that he quit the NW in December 2011 but didn’t tell anyone “because it was so loosely affiliated there was no one to tell”: he was saying, “Don’t sue ME when you start suing the NW.”

        He wanted it known that (a) there was really no NW so suing a bunch of “loosely affiliated” persons would be ridiculous; and (b) he got out of it before Trayvon Martin got killed.

        That was not about him dumping Fogen; that was about him protecting his own a55. Of course, it won’t work. It was Taaffe’s “fed up problems” that helped goad Fogen into murdering the boy.

    • Jun says:

      I think another point, considering the forensics and ballistics of the shot…

      which prove

      1) Fogenhats grabbed Trayvon the victim by the shirt and pulled downward and to the left, as that is the only way the hoodie and undershirt bullethole lines up with the chest wound

      2) Fogenhats also pulled the victim toward him to shoot him, considering that the gun when fired only had the muzzle make contact with the shirts only but are from intermediate range when the bullet hit the chest, at the same time as the motions mentioned above in section 1

      3) The above 2 signifies that the victim was still trying to just get away, and the defendant was the one pulling and holding the victim into the altercation and struggle, hence the defendant was not trying to let the altercation go

      considering the forensics and ballistics of how the gun was shot, Trayvon was being threatened with a gun before being shot, so he would have every right anyways to try to wrestle the gun away to prevent imminent death and great bodily harm

  32. whonoze says:

    Malisha wrote:

    “If I were O’Mara and Fogen was insisting on testifying, I’d make a motion to the court to be relieved as his counsel… If she did let him off Fogen would ask for another ten years to find counsel. If she did not let O’Mara off, one or more of the appeals would be based on that terrible error and the repercussions, real and imagined.”

    It occurs to me that MO’M may be throwing in the towel, not to Angela Corey, but to his wack-job client. He has to imagine GZ will get shredded if he goes on the stand, but if the defendant wants to talk he gets to talk. So MO’M could just be saying, “Fine, George, we’ll do it your way,” and then to himself “and you’ll get what you deserve for murdering that poor boy and showing no remorse.”

    In which case, MO’M would NOT ask to be removed, exactly for the reasons Malisha mentions (I don’t know if Fogen could find a competent attorney foolish enough to take him on in twenty-five years at this point, much less ten.) That is to say, in his heart of hearts, M’OM may want justice as much as we do. But as a defense attorney he is dedicated to making the State prove it’s case against the best defense possible. And if he has given his best advice to GZ, and GZ has rejected it repeatedly and finally, well then MO’M has met his ethical obligation, and Fogen is getting the best defense Fogen will allow.

    So, if they’ve resolved their disagreements about strategic by MO’M agreeing to just go along for the ride, ‘OM can sleep at night letting GZ take the consequences, and the thought of this trial dragging on for years through appeals or delays for the appointment of new council may make him sick to the stomach.

    (Yes, I have not written off Mark O’Mara as a human being. Please don’t hate on one of the rare moments of optimism amidst my typical cynical misanthropy.)

  33. Happy New Year, seallison, and everyone else!

  34. seallison says:

    Hope you all have a Happy New Year. We have had our differences at times but it has always been about Justice and working toward a better tomorrow. I don’t pray, but I do have good thoughts about Trayvon being with us in our hearts and minds. He does have a great future – not in the physical sense. But, his name will live on as the 17-year-old lanky kid who activated a nation to yell out loud and clear — we aint gonna take it any more!

    From Trayvon Martin to Jordan Davis to Newtown and all those before them — there will be Justice.

    Happy New Year, everyone!

  35. seallison says:

    (a) Did Trayvon respond to Fogen’s aggression by using more force than was reasonably necessary to defend himself?

    When Fogen followed Trayvon until they came face-to-face, I think this is what MOM is conceding that yes, Fogen was the aggressor.

    When they came face-to-face and Trayvon punched Fogen in the face, Trayvon became the aggressor because he used more force than necessary. He was not defending himself. He threw the first punch.

    He could have just explained to Fogen why he was in the neighbourhood and they would never have had a physical encounter.

    So, the answer is Yes.

    (b) Did Fogen reasonably perceive that Trayvon’s use of such force created an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury to himself, to Fogen?

    When Trayvon threw the first punch, Fogen fell to the ground and the aggressor got on top of him. Fogen did not know if the aggressor had a weapon or not. And the aggressor just kept punching him and banging his head on the concrete until he thought his head would explode. People have died from brain injuries. At that point, Fogen felt he would suffer serious bodily injury but could not get away to do anything about it.

    When Trayvon realized Fogen had a gun, Trayvon said – your gonna die tonight MF, Fogen already felt the fear of great bodily harm and now he was told he was going to die.

    So, it was no longer Fogens gun, it was THE gun. Fogen felt he had run out of time and was then able to access the gun and had to shoot. He had no more time to do anything else.

    So, the answer is yes.

    (c) Did Fogen attempt to end the confrontation and withdraw before he used deadly force?

    He tried to diffuse the situation when he immediately answered Trayvon by saying – No, I dont have a problem. It didnt help. Trayvon sucker-punched him and the beating ensued. He couldn’t withdraw. Trayvon had him pinned down. He tried and was able to shimmy away from the concrete. But, in doing so, his jacket moved up and exposed his gun. His fear turned from a reasonable fear of serious bodily harm to an imminent danger of dying – especially when Trayvon said he was going to die. He had run out of time to make any decision. The decision was made for him. He had to shoot or be shot.

    It was all Gods plan. So, the answer is yes.

    Was that an okay devils advocate.

    • The only thing that I can see wrong with it is that the physical evidence is going to push all of that right out the window. LOL

    • bunny620 says:

      Fogen, is that you?! 🙂

    • You all have thoughtful comments says:

      I am surprised by your post here, seallison.

    • seallison says:

      What the hey – I gave it a shot. LOL

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        So you post was just a joke?

      • seallison says:

        Of course, it was a joke!! This is what the folk say is an easy win. This is why I put it out there – even said – devils advocate. I think it is a joke. But, if Fogen takes the stand, he is gonna want the jury to believe it.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        Whew, seallison…..You have to watch out for those of us who are slow to catch on to a joke. I am in that slow group.

      • You all have thoughtful comments says:

        I can’t believe I did not read your last sentence. LOL at me!

      • Cercando Luce says:

        “The folk..?” An easy win for Folk’s-Fogen? Those people shouldn’t drink and drive that particular vehicle in this race. Guess the Devil makes ’em do it.

    • mcave77 says:

      (a) You seem to be leaving off part of DDs statement. Yes she said that TM asked GZ “why are you following me” and he said no but couldn’t GZ had diffused the situation by explaining to TM why he WAS FOLLOWING him? This is exactly what Serino put in his report. DD also says that she hears TM say “Get Off” twice. Why was he yelling “get off”…wouldn’t that make GZ the aggressor?

      Furthermore, GZ could have simply rolled down his window and told TM about his concerns and asked him any questions. There was never a need for him to drive behind TM slowly in the dark and/or for him to get out of his vehicle and pursue TM.

      (b)’When Trayvon threw the first punch, Fogen fell to the ground and the aggressor got on top of him.”

      If this is true then how did TM’s body get 40+ feet S of the T? GZ says that he was tapping his flashlight trying to get it to work so he wouldn’t have to walk back across the T in the dark. (Never mind that a small flashlight was found ON and his truck headlights should have provided some light for a while). He also told Serino that he had a flashlight in his hand when they met. That same flashlight is found near the body. Are we to believe that he held on to that the entire time they struggled? (b) is based on a lie told by GZ.

      (c)”Trayvon had him pinned down. He tried and was able to shimmy away from the concrete. But, in doing so, his jacket moved up and exposed his gun.”

      There is no proof that TM had GZ pinned down at the time of the shot. Are you going by witness 6? There is approximately a 90 second time gap between the time witness 6 came out and stated he was going to call 911 and the shot. This is according to witness 19 who was timed. Witness 12 and 18 both think GZ was on top. Witness 18 specifically says she believes GZ was on top at the time of the shot.

      Also, I believe you can hear GZ perform a chamber check during the NEN call which would mean that the gun was out before GZ claims it was. I cannot prove this however and will have to wait for the experts.

      You also have the experts that have come out and stated that that is NOT GZ yelling and a couple of the witnesses stating they heard a “NO” before the shot. If TM was screaming at the time of the shot, then (c) is completely false.

      “He tried and was able to shimmy away from the concrete. ”

      You might want to tell GZ this..lol because he claims that TM was still banging his head into the concrete up until the shot. Listen to his first interview with Singleton…

      • Cercando Luce says:

        Whonoze has said that we shouldn’t demonize the defendant, but I have believed since the first time I heard that 911 call that the gunshot was the culmination of defendant’s sadism.

        The whole exercise in following Trayvon slowly by truck, and then by foot in the dark, and then manhandling him while he shrieked, was to satisfy defendant’s sadistic urges. There was no question of defendant allowing Trayvon to live once he was pleading for his life in face of the gun; defendant is a SADIST who felt fabulously empowered by the situation he created and he wasn’t going to deprive himself of his ultimate satisfaction.

        This is what gun laws must limit; there are sadists among us who have ready access to easy-fire weapons which endanger everyone else (and quite a few members of the public in 2012 have paid for it with their lives).

        I’m not calling defendant a demon.

    • Malisha says:

      OK, you tried, but that devil better go hire a better advocate. See, to properly advocate all those answers, the attorney for the devil has to have a few demonstrable facts or, at the very least, a few allegations that are not immediately disproven.

      Let me count the ways:

      1. Trayvon sucker punched Fogen.
      Disproof: None of Fogen’s DNA traveled with the punch.

      2. Fogen fell to the ground immediately.
      Disproof: He would have fallen to the ground 40 feet away from where he shot Trayvon Martin.

      3. Then Trayvon got on top of Fogen and beat violently, putting him in fear for his life.
      Disproof: Impossible for Fogen to have had such minor injuries had he sustained that kind of a beating.

      4. Then Trayvon threatened Fogen’s life when he saw the gun and tried to get it.
      Disproof: Physically impossible for Trayvon to have seen the gun pursuant to the narrative given by Fogen.

      5. Had Trayvon simply explained what he was doing in the neighborhood he would not have put Fogen at fear for his life.
      Disproof: Fogen does not claim that he ever ASKED Trayvon what he was doing in the neighborhood.

      6. “I don’t have a problem” meant that Fogen was trying to retreat from the fight.
      Disproof: If you are asked, in a hostile voice, if you have a problem, and you want to indicate that you are retreating from the fight, you must explicitly state that you do not want to fight and/or that you mean no harm. Fogen doesn’t even pretend that he did this.

      OK, don’t feel bad, devil’s advocate. I’ll tell you a little story that will make it all better.

      An engineer died and went to Purgatory. His first day in orientation, one of Satan’s imps came to him to let him know what would happen to him while he served his time. He followed the imp around for a while and then said he wanted to see Satan directly. The Imp said, “We don’t do that,” but the engineer was so persuasive that eventually the Imp took him to see Satan. He came into Satan’s office. He said, “You have a big place here, and a lot of employees. You have them running up and down all day from the first circle to the seventh circle dishing out all these punishments. You need a series of escalators. I can build that for you. Satan was very impressed and he got it done immediately. It took one month and then Hell was considerably improved.

      The next month, the engineer again importuned the Imp to take him in to see Satan. He said, “You’ve got fire, you’ve got ice, you have brimstone pits, you’ve got hot coals, you have all these unhealthful conditions and your employees are coughing and sputtering all day. You need good ventilation here. I can put that in for you. Satan glimmered! “Go to it!” he shouted. “I’m gonna have a great Hell soon!” The engineer finished work on that project in another month and then, once again, came back to see Satan, who by then was just delighted as all get-out.

      “What you need next is air conditioned offices for the Imps and you,” he said, and before he could explain, Satan authorized the project and it was completed in two weeks.

      God had been watching this whole time, and he was not pleased. He called down to Satan.

      “You’re getting upgraded, and you don’t deserve to be upgraded; you need to stay downgraded forever.”

      Satan said: “I’ve got me an engineer down here and he’s doing whatever I want and that’s how it’s gonna be from now on.”

      Now God was incensed. “I am taking that engineer away and bringing him up here RIGHT NOW!” he stormed.

      Satan laughed: “You instituted this system yourself; you know you can’t change somebody’s sentence when YOU are the one who made the sentence. There’s no appeal from YOUR DECISION. He STAYS!”

      God clouded over and rumbled. “I AM GOING TO SUE YOU!”

      Satan dissolved into laughter. “HA HA HA!” he shrieked, “Sue me? Where you gonna find a lawyer?” 😈

    • cielo62 says:

      Seallison- that was AWESOME! It takes each and every argument floated by the Zidiots and strings together in the way THEY BELIEVE that the true GZ story happened! You got each bell and whistle! Too bad something called evidence stands in the way….

      Sent from my iPod

    • FactsFirst says:

      Now that’s what I’m talking about… Get it seallison!!! I wanna see more people playing devil’s advocate/DEFENSE ATTORNEY.. I want to be ready for whatever the defense throws at this case…. However, I was worried about you for a minute seallison…LOL! This can be a tough crowd… LOL!

    • Jun says:

      I could be wrong but considering that the boy was being stalked and chased by the defendant, the defendant with a gun and a car, the defendant with a long history of bullying stalking violence, I think it would be justified to punch Fogenhats in the face…

      A stranger keeps stalking and chasing you, trying to get you everywhere you go, presents a physical threat, especially if they have a gun…

      I feel it is reasonable with anyone, if a stranger in a car starts stalking you, then chasing you when you try to run away, and keeps relentlessly trying to get you when you run away, when the stranger catches up to you, it is reasonable to think you are in danger, especially since you are unarmed and the stranger has a gun…

      I think it is ridiculous to simply submit to the will of a complete stranger who keeps stalking and pursuing you trying to get you, when that would come off as threatening to anyone, especially if that stranger is angry and has a gun and you are unarmed…

      anyways, there is no forensic evidence the victim even punched the defendant at all… his nose bleed was so minor, not even broken

      but anyways just arguing if that scenario were true

      part of self defense is avoiding a struggle altogether so why not strike the opponent and try to run or whatever…

    • thejbmission says:

      Hi Seallison,
      I appreciate you taking devil’s advocate stance but it would be best if you used some facts instead of Fogen’s lies. I doubt the jurors will put much stock into Fogen’s words after reading all of his statements because there are no two statements that are alike.
      For example, you said;

      He tried to diffuse the situation when he immediately answered Trayvon by saying – No, I dont have a problem. It didnt help.

      You’re assuming TM asked “Do you have a problem homie?” Those are Fogen’s words. cough
      According to Witness 8, DeeDee TM asked, “What are you following me for?” The answer to that question should have been, “I’m NWC aka NAH and you’re acting suspicious, I’ve already called 911 and they are on the way..yada, yada”
      Even if I want to believe TM said “You got a problem homie?” The “HONEST” answer to that question would be YES because Fogen had a big problem — he’s out there like a fool, chasing a stranger in the rain, huffing and puffing, out of breath, peeing in his pants, so for him to say NO, he didn’t have a problem only escalated the situation and made him seem like a crazed stalker.

      • Xena says:

        The “HONEST” answer to that question would be YES because Fogen had a big problem — he’s out there like a fool, chasing a stranger in the rain, huffing and puffing, out of breath, peeing in his pants, so for him to say NO, he didn’t have a problem only escalated the situation and made him seem like a crazed stalker.

        Absolutely! You don’t tell anyone you don’t have a problem and then start reaching in your pockets. If you don’t have a problem, you walk away.

    • Kelly Payne says:

      The only question trayvon asked was. “What are you following me for?”

  36. Tzar says:

    Fogen believes he can just say “I don’t know” to every question and he will be sent home

    • “Home” in his case likely will be a jail cell where he will await sentencing.

    • rayvenwolf says:

      And so do his supporters.I doubt it has fully sunken in for him just how deep the hole is around him. Maybe once the backhoe starts pushing the dirt in, he’ll get a clue.

    • Malisha says:

      It’s so mind-boggling how Fogen never gives up the idea that this can’t be happening to him. His circular reasoning is that he’s a decent American, therefore he has credibility, therefore his story is true, therefore he didn’t do anything wrong. You can’t possibly be challenging his statement that he didn’t do anything wrong because he’s a decent American. He will never see his way out of this perfect circle so he cannot understand how anybody else does, so they are suspicious, they are lying, they are conspiring against a decent American. And their motives are all bad because by definition, he’s right so they’re motivated to do wrong. It would be very funny if it weren’t attractive to people like Wolfinger, who will make decisions based upon the inviolability of theories like this.

      • Extremely odd co-inky-dink that that is the same rationale racists use to claim they aren’t racists.

        But they couldn’t be racists because they told us that they aren’t

        And since they’re decent Americans

        They wouldn’t lie about that,

        Or about mentoring nonexistent children.

  37. Malisha says:

    Oh I agree that the scenario is possible that Fogen believes he should testify and therefore he insists upon it, either in a “self-defense hearing” (which would have to be a hearing on a motion to dismiss the charges, which is not really anticipated in Florida law unless you’re trying for SYG immunity — since regular self-defense is an affirmative defense but it is not a form of immunity) or at trial. But O’Mara does have a reputation to protect. Did he allow the Hannity catastrophe? Yes. But remember two things about the Hannity interview: (1) Fogen did not have to be sworn in under oath; and (2) Whatever damage Fogen did would be just that — damage — and only in the public’s eye, not in a judge’s turf. So even if it did the worst damage it could do (which I think is pretty obvious), it would not result in a judge or jury saying, “Game Over, Do not pass GO, do not collect $200, go directly to jail.”

    Hannity was a gamble. O’Mara thought he could lose or he could win. I think if he considers the odds at SYG hearing or trial, the odds are much MUCH different and the loss potentially much worse.

    If I were O’Mara and Fogen was insisting on testifying, I’d make a motion to the court to be relieved as his counsel because I would say there had been that good old “irreconcilable differences” in the strategy of the defense. The judge would probably understand that to mean, “The fool wants to get up there and open his damn mouth,” and she might or might not let him off. If she did let him off Fogen would ask for another ten years to find counsel. If she did not let O’Mara off, one or more of the appeals would be based on that terrible error and the repercussions, real and imagined.

    Right now I’m betting 50% on a plea deal and 50% on an attempted escape. Much probably depends on things we cannot see and won’t be able to see even with an electronic microscope and a Kassagraine telescope stuck together with crazy glue.

    • You said about the defendant’s statements during the Hannity interview,

      So even if it did the worst damage it could do (which I think is pretty obvious), it would not result in a judge or jury saying, “Game Over, Do not pass GO, do not collect $200, go directly to jail.”

      The State will be able to cross examine him at trial regarding the statements that he made during the Hannity interview. Therefore, the judge and the jury will get to hear them.

      • Malisha says:

        I love that; I love that; that makes it worthwhile that I forced myself to watch him on Hannity. I mean I spent a fortune on my anti-nausea medication to get through that!

    • “Fogen would ask for another ten years to find counsel.”
      what i have to say to that: LMFAO!

      but myself (and some others i’ve noticed recently) don’t believe there will be an immunity hearing at all. it’s too risky, they’d be showing ALL of their lies- instead of just the 47thousand lies they’ve shown already!

      but now i think you might right on GZ running, if he was getting enough money from the other morons.
      remember he’s NOT allowed to have a bank account either..but i guess shellie can so he’s got that.. when is that perjury case being heard!? i really can’t wait.

      • Shellie’s lawyer has a motion pending to dismiss the perjury charge on the ground that Angela Corey lacks authority to prosecute her, since she’s the State Attorney in another circuit (Jacksonville). However, the governor’s appointment includes investigating and prosecuting criminal conduct related to the shooting and Shellie committed perjury when she lied about the shooter’s assets at his bond hearing.

        I don’t believe the motion has any chance of winning, but even if it does, the State Attorney who replaced Wolfinger would take over the case.

      • ellejay says:

        re: shellie’s perjury case.

        –it has been continued to jan.23rd (her attorney filed for a waiver of her appearance for that date.)

        –judge nelson will no longer be hearing it, the case was re-assigned to judge marlene alva, while judge nelson keeps the murder case as well as the gz v NBC case.

      • Xena says:

        ASA Guy is the prosecutor who signed the information charging Shellie, and he did so under special appointment, so I seriously doubt that the lack of jurisdiction claim is going to stick. ASA Guy is the prosecutor who has attended hearings in GZ’s case with BDLR.

      • Jun says:

        They can also prosecute based on fresh pursuit under Florida law. If any appointed law enforcement officer, whether court or street, witnesses a crime, they can arrest on the spot, no matter the county

        and Corey represents the State of Florida as a prosecutor so she can represent them in any county, I believe

        furthermore, they were all witness to the felony in plain sight, and freshly pursued her, and the whole point of the fresh pursuit was to get rid of unnecessary delay in prosecuting

        • It’s hot pursuit, not fresh pursuit and it’s an exception to the search warrant requirement. It does not apply to a decision by a prosecutor to charge someone with perjury based on something they testify to under oath in a court hearing.

      • Jun says:

        http://law.justia.com/codes/florida/2010/TitleXLVII/chapter901/901_25.html

        This is what I was referring to

        The officers who arrested Shellie had jurisdiction within the state

        They took her to a judge to indict her within the county, with no delay

        and from what I understand, Corey represents the state, I think, so she simply indicted her with no delay since it happened on her watch

        and from what I read, a State Prosecutor is the chief law enforcement officer of her county

        I could be wrong but it sounds like Corey has authority to arrest and charge Shellie

      • Jun says:

        Also Freddy

        according to here

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Florida

        A state prosecutor is considered a state officer, so if we go by the statute I just posted, 901.25, Corey has authority to arrest and indict her with no delay, even without the Governor’s order

        As for actually prosecuting the case and filing indictment, I think she can also handle that aspect because of fresh pursuit but I am not sure, as the statute I read only covers arrest

        However, she does represent the state, and Seminole is a county within the state, so…

      • Jun says:

        That’s true too

        as if you read 901.25, it was all about unnecessary delay in prosecution

        so referring to that statute sounds like unnecessary delay

        It is just more to the point to just say she lied during my murder 2 indictment court hearings, therefore, we arrested and indicted her

    • rayvenwolf says:

      Malisha I think we are gonna have to see how the next few months go. The walls are closing in and I still can’t shake the feeling like he may try and rabbit out of Florida(and probably the country as well. A deal I can see happening if his escape attempts fail, otherwise Fogen is gonna go down with his ship.

      • Operacarla says:

        This case is so huge…I’m sure fogen is being watched very carefully, and I don’t think anyone in the Z house has enough brains to outwit Law Enforcement. I hope I’m right. Happy New Year to all of you!

      • Malisha says:

        I agree that Fogen could not “outwit law enforcement” but what worries me is that on 2/26/2012 he didn’t “outwit law enforcement” either. Singleton saw through him in a quick minute. Serino saw through him in a quick minute and a half and led him into all kinds of self-incrimination. Everybody in that station house knew that he had profiled and murdered Trayvon Martin. But then … dahn da dahn dahn … all those law enforcement officers just failed to realize Fogen needed to be charged with a crime. Hard to believe, but it happened. And although it’s hard to believe, I wonder if it might not happen again.

        • rayvenwolf says:

          If this had somehow managed to be swept under the rug I would agree, but there is far too much sunlight on this situation. Though GZ will go down more for SPD’s failings than his actual crime.

          Is that right? No. Will I loose sleep over it? Nope.

      • Cercando Luce says:

        @Malisha
        And when investigator recommended he be charged, SAO rep (IIRC)described the capias filing as being “F*&^%$ up the^$&%*” to use his technical expression

    • seallison says:

      I think this is what all the – we have no money stuff is all about. They need to wriggle out of having the immunity hearing without causing a fuss with the supporters who are paying the bills. If they say they cant afford it, it works in their favour. More money will pour in to help out. But, they still cant afford the immunity hearing (and don’t want it either) – Oh well, they say. We will just go straight to trial. Please keep those donations coming in. Just tell the supporters that Judge Nelson is historically not all that willing to grant immunity so why waste the money by trying.

    • Jun says:

      I believe Fogenhats will try to get Omara to present his statements for him, and then Bernie will object on grounds of hearsay and then Omara will tell Fogenhats that only Fogenhats can present his statements in court and have to swear an oath and be subject to cross examination

      Then

      Fogenhats will flip out in court like the rapist at Nelson’s other trial because it is not going his way because he realizes he cant pull the potted palm during the SYG hearing or the trial

  38. Malisha says:

    I still don’t think O’Mara is incompetent enough to put Fogen on the stand. If he were to do so, at either a SYG hearing or a trial, the results would be such a boon for the prosecution that it can hardly be imagined. Fogen cannot keep his foot out of his mouth for long enough to brush his toenails or clip his teeth.

    • jm says:

      Malisha: “I still don’t think O’Mara is incompetent enough to put Fogen on the stand.”

      Was it MOM’s idea to have his client do an interview with Sean Hannity? Did he approve it?

      Not sure how much influence MOM has over his client because GZ seems delusional enough to think he can convince others of his “story” of what happened the night he killed Trayvon Martin. If he wants to testify, can MOM stop him?

      • nope, if gz insists on testifying omar can’t stop him.
        and i think gz had already been in touch w/hannity before omar was in the picture. i don’t think anything could have stopped gz from making the public ass out of himself he did! LOL

        AFAIK the only thing an attorney can do is advise his client. if the client doesn’t take the advice the lawyer’s only recourse is to resign. they don’t have to go along with any ol thing the client wants. like omar didn’t have to go on TV and in court and malign Trayvon like he did. he didn’t have to sit up in court and lie about Trayvon having bruising on his knuckles and pump his fist at the cameras!

    • Rachael says:

      IDK, he was too incompetent to sign a contract with the security service.

      • Cercando Luce says:

        He’d better get the defendant to sign a waiver stating that defendant has made all his statements contrary to counsel!

    • It’s not O’Mara’s choice to make. The defendant has the right to testify, regardless of his counsel’s advice.

      The defendant is in tough spot. Because of the hearsay rule, he cannot win unless he testifies, but he will lose, if he testifies, because his inconsistent and contradictory statements are in conflict with the physical evidence and the forensics.

      “Just because my client is a pathological liar, doesn’t mean he’s a depraved murderer,” ain’t gonna git ‘r done when the physical evidence and the forensics prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

      • Ok, so if this winds up going to trial, and I’m sure it will, because immunity will surely be off the table, GZ isn’t required to take the stand, even if claiming self-defense? I can’t imagine him trying to prove self-defense and not having to answer these questions himself.

        • cielo62 says:

          Oh no! GZ will WANT to take the stand! He is convinced that if he could EXPLAIN what happened, everybody will see what a great guy he is and let him go.

          Sent from my iPod

      • Prof….How on earth would MOM prepare someone like fogen to testify, in the likelyhood that fogen would even consider “telling (another side of) his story”…..(once again)?

      • thejbmission says:

        Good questions. I answered them without reading anyone else’s response.
        To the first question,
        (a) Did Trayvon respond to Fogen’s aggression by using more force than was reasonably necessary to defend himself?
        No, he did not. He may have used his hands but that is the body’s natural protective mechanism AND he did have another option. He could have used the can of soda but he didn’t and that says alot about the young man’s aggression. He was not a violent person. In my opinion, Trayvon used minimal force.
        (b) Did Fogen reasonably perceive that Trayvon’s use of such force created an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury to himself, to Fogen?
        For one, there was no weapon. Fogen could have done several things to protect himself before resorting to deadly force. He could have told Trayvon who he was and why he was following him. When he saw TM approach him, he could have ran back to his truck and wait for LE. There was no reason for Fogen to shoot because he knew LE were on the way. And of course, none of Fogen’s injuries needed medical attention. Stupid decision by Fogen but he is a stupid man.
        (c) Did Fogen attempt to end the confrontation and withdraw before he used deadly force?
        Not according to Fogen. He’s never mentioned in any statement that he wished he could have gotten away. Fogen’s would not have stopped fighting without having hogtied his “suspect”. That was his only intent because he bemoaned, “These assholes always get away”. Those are damning words in my opinion.

      • …..lol….lol….lol….lol ! ! !

      • BTW….My lol’s were in response to the Prof’s response to my question re: MOM preparing fogen to testify………lol..again to his answer.

    • Oh Malisha, I thought I’d have one day that I wasn’t rolling on the floor with laughter (causing my cats to flee in all directions from the crazy lady)….but nooo. You are so wickedly funny!
      😆 😆 😆

    • Kelly Payne says:

      I’m not a lawyer but i do believe at an SYG hearing he will be required to testify

      • Because of the Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, no defendant can ever be compelled to testify.

        That includes a defendant at an SYG or self-defense immunity hearing

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Of course, by not testifying in his own behalf, he’s left without a witness, who can explain why he was reasonably justified to fear for his life. So, if that’s the case, he might just as well not ask for the SYG hearing, because he’s setting himself up to lose by default.

    • Looolooo says:

      Jonathan Capehart is an excellent journalist, MSNBC commentator and substitue host.

      • Xena says:

        Reading comments posted to that article gave me a very sick feeling. Rather than address Newtown, people started off by demonizing Trayvon Martin and it became offense-defense. I would think that those supporting justice for Trayvon have learned by now how trolls operate to provoke and violate all public resources that allow them to troll, and ignore Zidiots. The arguments are not convincing anyone one way or the other. They should let the hungry Zidiots who seek to devour starve by depriving them of attention.

      • Looolooo says:

        Apparently an innocent unarmed teenage murder victim is more deserving of consentrated vicious lies, racist remarks and outrageous character assinations, than an adult premeditated murderer with high powered weapons who casually and savagely gunned down 6 & 7 year-olds at their home away from home, and their heroic teachers.

        Also, notice how victim Trayvon’s parents and attorney’s are subjected to wide open hatred, scorn, a lack of compassion and utter disrespect, while Adam Lanza’s parents and brother have not been vilified in the least. Other than mentioning that his mother was an avid gun collector. His father seems to have been absolved of any responsibility for allowing dangerous weapons around his menally deranged son.

        Welcome to the wonderful world of internet anonymity.

  39. oops two links above 😦

  40. yes, thank you Prof for keeping this blog so helpful. you are one in a billion! 🙂

    happy new year to all of my good friends here and Tracy and Sybrina and all of Trayvon’s family and friends.

    Sybrina and Tracy in essence mag. http://t.co/u31YqRGH

    anyone who wants to support the ChangeforTrayvon.com
    http://t.co/cE817gyl

  41. bettykath says:

    Malisha did a good job. The defendant will receive much more damage in the cross examination than he received at the hands of Trayvon. And he will be far less able to defend himself.

  42. whonoze says:

    “How do you think the defendant will do on cross examination?”

    I think his GooZe iz cooked.

    • I think he will trip over his tongue horribly and that the state will have him trembling.

      • Malisha says:

        I don’t think he will even realize how badly he is doing. I think he will continue to make up his patchwork of lies to cover everything and expect that they will work. If he is asked anything he can’t think up an answer for, he will say he doesn’t remember or he doesn’t know and his memory is poor. He will say this happened a certain way “because” and then he will give a nonsequitorial sound byte to supply the alleged “becausability” that he thinks provides plausibility. I think he will imagine that he tied BDLR in knots by the time he’s done! He’s out of touch with just how idiotic he sounds spouting the crap that comes out of his mouth. I bet he thought he really dominated the airwaves on the Hannity show! His hubris knows no bounds.

      • Rachael says:

        I agree with every word you said.

      • Looolooo says:

        @Malisha

        ” i don’t know”, or ” i don’t remember” ….. in that really soft, low, soothing whiper of his, when he’s so obviously caught in one of his legeion of lies.

    • Two sides to a story says:

      Yez.

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        Too bad for GZ, he said he killed Trayvon in two places. Once, down near the T where he was knocked down, where he wiggled himself onto the grass, drew his weapon and fired the shot, before his head could explode.

        Then, when the body is pointed to some 40 feet away, he basically tells the same story, only this time he interacts with witnesses, during the deadly assault.

        Then, to top it all off, he lies at the bail hearing, about the amount of money he has to make bail. I don’t know, but I don’t think the jury is going to take that jaw thrust forward, scene on the video, as him being kindly or even grateful to his wife, whose on the stand lying to protect his cash horde.

        Too many ways for this “Indecent American” to go down, too few ways for him to go up. He’s toast for sure!

        • jm says:

          Lonnie: “Too many ways for this “Indecent American” to go down, too few ways for him to go up. He’s toast for sure!”

          Speaking of an indecent American, do you think RZ Jr knows the truth about GZ and is just trying to BS the public?

          Guess my question is whether RZ Jr is stupid or a liar?

      • Looolooo says:

        @jm

        Of course RZJ knows the truth about his little brother. He is not stupid, he is fully aware of GZ’s history of violence and other criminal activity (as does his parents, etc.), but for some reason he (they) choose too completely ignore reality, possibly for fame and money. RZJ would do ANYTHING it took to get himself in front of a camera. I’m almost certain that RZJ has the potential to inflict even greater harm to some one than GZ. He’s scary, and so obviously mentally deranged.

        Does anyone know as to why mom and pop Z sent GZ (alone) ahead of them when they moved to FL from VA when he was just 17 or 18? Had he been expelled or something?

        • cielo62 says:

          Looloo- I think the consensus here is that he got into some legal trouble, maybe something associated with that gang tat of his. Unfortunately juvenile records are sealed, so we’ll never know.

          Sent from my iPod

        • Xena says:

          Does anyone know as to why mom and pop Z sent GZ (alone) ahead of them when they moved to FL from VA when he was just 17 or 18? Had he been expelled or something?

          Only the Zimmermans know, but GZ tells us of his life in VA on his MySpace page. He was running into Mexicans with knives. He had his boys commit crimes for him, do a year’s time in jail and not tell on him. GZ has a gang tattoo. At 18, he would be charged as an adult. So, what does he do after he gets to Florida? Become a bouncer.

      • Malisha says:

        LooLoo, “he is fully aware of GZ’s history of violence and other criminal activity (as does his parents, etc.), but for some reason he (they) choose too completely ignore reality, possibly for fame and money. ”

        They’re not ignoring reality; they’re making their own reality. Those closed-system families have an axiomatic, religious-type belief that they are good, and that is “GOOD” by definition. Therefore, whatever they do to others is either what the others DESERVED or what they HAD to do because the others were BAD. They are coercive and controlling within the system and they are practiced liars, even among themselves, and EVEN in their own minds. They just adjust reality and say things their own way and a nanosecond later they believe their own stories and whoever says differently is a “liar” with a bad motive trying to do harm to a decent American family.

        I have extensive experience dealing with a tribe like this; they are natural-born abusers. They go to their graves still thinking everything they did was perfect. My ex-husband’s family drove one of their members to suicide and then blamed it on everyone else, including ME! I was the one telling them constantly that they should get him psychiatric help so they insisted that he killed himself because I insulted him. They’re nuts and disgusting and you never get anywhere trying to figure out their motives or their “real beliefs.”

Leave a Reply to Cercando Luce Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: